4 ms·
My only concern is for those who's credit card information was used illegally. If I were an employer, I'd be concerned about hiring someone who joined this sit
by mdip 11y ago
My only concern is for those who's credit card information was used illegally. If I were an employer, I'd be concerned about hiring someone who joined this site. Most jobs put people in a position where they could "get away" with theft or other illegal activities that could deeply harm the company and I can see employers being very concerned about hiring someone associated with the site. Those folks just had their lives ruined -- even when they manage to prove to the banks that the activity was illegal, they're now associated with this for life.
As for the "real users". I don't think the lack of sympathy stems from people's misunderstanding that extramarital affairs are not "illegal". Most marriages have an expectation of monogamy and most users of this site were doing so in order to enjoy that activity without getting caught. They were the ones who decided to engage in an activity that broke up their family and "destroyed lives". This just sped up the process of getting caught. Aside from the moral contract that was broken, the cheating spouse also exposed their partner to sexually transmitted diseases without their knowledge.
I think sites like this are despicable and people using them should expect that a site that caters to helping you "get away with things" is not a trustworthy place to do business. They actually charged $19 to have your profile "completely removed" and then didn't do what was paid for.
I don't condone "vigilante punishment" and a read of the comments seems focused more on the activities of the users than the condoning of how they were caught, but I completely understand the lack of sympathy. I doubt you'd see such a lack of sympathy if the site catered to helping individuals escape addiction or cope with mental illness -- where a similar desire for anonymity exists.
Two wrongs don't make a right, yes, but expecting the average married person to have a lot of sympathy for a site that caters to weak people who'd rather destroy their marriage than figure out how to be a good wife, husband, father or mother is a stretch. There are many corners of the internet that make a huge profit catering to vice that is not illegal but getting caught doing these things would have consequences outside of the law. Users engaged in that activity are choosing to accept the consequences and folks investing in sites like this need to fully understand that the site has a big red target on their back; it will probably be attacked successfully at some point in the future.
As an aside, why is it assumed that all cheaters are men?
The "vigilantes" frustrated me most with the comment Too bad for those men, they’re cheating dirtbags and deserve no such discretion. Anecdotally, I know of several relationships broken up by infidelity. I doubt I'm alone, it seems to be the main reason that my friends' marriages end in divorce -- people don't like to be alone so rather than end their marriage, attempt to mature and figure out why they were so unhappy, they jump to another partner and start off a new relationship with no trust as the foundation. In my small dataset, almost all of the affairs were had by women.
- ulrikrasmussen 11y agoI do not expect anyone to have much sympathy with the site nor its users. But still, being publicly defamed on the internet for eternity is far too harsh a punishment for cheating on your spouse. The motivations for cheating can be complicated, and while it certainly destroys many relationships, I believe that some might still be salvaged when the cheater can come clean on his/her own terms. Outing a cheater which you have no relationship with is a disgusting violation of the privacy of all parties involved, including the partner who was cheated on. It is interesting how the anonymity of the internet suddenly makes people more comfortable with shaming other people whom they have no personal relationship with. I guess I'm just opposed to having a society where people punish strangers for not living up to their own moral codes. If we accept that someone reveals the names of cheaters on the internet, then we are accepting a society where it is okay to meddle in the most intimate parts of other peoples lives, even if their actions do not affect ourselves or society as a whole. This is wrong and disgusting in the same way as it is wrong when vigilante "sharia patrols" roam muslim neighborhoods in London, to bring up an admittedly extreme example. It is none of my business how other people lead their lives, even if I disagree with their lifestyle, as long as their actions do not harm me or the society as a whole. There is a reason we do not have a karma police.
- ysv2 11y ago> It is none of my business how other people lead their lives, even if I disagree with their lifestyle, as long as their actions do not harm me or the society as a whole. Willful deceit and endangering your spouse is not a "lifestyle choice", it's wrong in an objective ethical sense. Exposing your spouse to sexually transmitted diseases without their knowledge harms society as a whole. In cases where it's a wife cheating on a husband, forcing men to pay to raise children who are not their own harms society as a whole. I'm not in favor of this kind of vigilantism either, by the way. But I think the relativism you express above, implying that cheating is a personal decision without a victim, is desperately in need of a reality check.
- ulrikrasmussen 11y agoI admit that "lifestyle" is bad wording which sounds way too apologetic towards cheating. Of course there are victims, but society has still decided not to make cheating a punishable crime, nonetheless. My point is that it is not the duty of me to expose my fellow citizen, it is a private matter between that person and his/her spouse.