(October 27, 2016 at 4:32 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Ok, so to be clearer, if "Johnny" is the username, then you can't say you're in a relationship unless you have his permission. If "Johnny" is the real name of a non-member, or the real name of a member and people don't know you are talking about that member when you say "Johnny", then you can say you're in a relationship with them because it doesn't lead back to that person or that member.
To use a real world example, say we are in a relationship (which we are) but for whatever reason you didn't want people to know yet, and nobody on the forums knew. Here are some statements I could make that are both against the rule, or not against the rule.
1) I'm in a relationship with Shell B - AGAINST the rule, because I'm revealing private / personal information about you, the member.
2) I'm in a relationship with a girl named XXXX - NOT AGAINST the rule, because the name "XXXX" doesn't directly refer to you, even though it's your name. It could refer to any other person named XXXX.
3) I'm in a relationship with a girl named XXXX and her phone number is XYZ - AGAINST the rule, because it's revealing private / personal information.
To be even clearer, the only reason this is under the "doxing" rule is because it kinda made sense to put it there. We couldn't have created an entirely new rule for it, maybe we should have in hindsight, but I think for now it's fine.
This is absolutely silly. There was a perfectly fine doxing rule in effect and now there's a nanny rule that could logically prohibit members from talking about their own relationships, a topic which, again, has nothing to do with the forum. Why can't this be left to people in their own private relationships to decide in their own private lives?
