EPTTurn him in, as anonymously as possible. Do not feel bad about it, it is a good thing that you help to stop this and the only people getting help do absolutely deserve it. Also, considering how this thread went, I would never ask for seriously advice on TL again if I were you.
Need Advice- Academic Dishonesty - Page 3
| Blogs > DarkRave90 |
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
Turn him in, as anonymously as possible. Do not feel bad about it, it is a good thing that you help to stop this and the only people getting help do absolutely deserve it. Also, considering how this thread went, I would never ask for seriously advice on TL again if I were you. | ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
| ||
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9179 Posts
Both of you should be fired. Only one of you would go to jail. | ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
On April 15 2013 19:46 FakeDouble wrote: Oh, good, I was just about to suggest exactly this. Keeps you anonymous, guy gets what he deserves. Unfortunately for you, your friend gets burned too, unless you decide to not forward that particular one/delete those emails. But then the original owner of the email may be able to trace you, so you probably shouldn't be selective about it. Oh and on the point of "my friends will get caught too" and directed at the OP: screw them. They're cheating, so what if they are your friends. The status of "your friend" means nothing to the world and holds no value whatsoever. Grow up a little and consider things outside the realm of your personal bubble. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18870 Posts
On April 16 2013 04:01 CecilSunkure wrote: Oh and on the point of "my friends will get caught too" and directed at the OP: screw them. They're cheating, so what if they are your friends. The status of "your friend" means nothing to the world and holds no value whatsoever. Grow up a little and consider things outside the realm of your personal bubble. lol......friendship is in the eye of the beholder. Who cares what "the world" (lol?) thinks, if you care about someone enough and they fuck up, it is conceivable that you would want to help them. There are a number of people in my life who, given past experiences, I would lie for in an instant. That you've never had friends like that doesn't mean that no one else does, nor does it mean that their different treatment of friendship is in any way wrong. | ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
On April 16 2013 04:06 farvacola wrote: lol......friendship is in the eye of the beholder. Who cares what "the world" (lol?) thinks, if you care about someone enough and they fuck up, it is conceivable that you would want to help them. There are a number of people in my life who, given past experiences, I would lie for in an instant. That you've never had friends like that doesn't mean that no one else does, nor does it mean that their different treatment of friendship is in any way wrong. Yeah I agree, I just think it's healthy to hear an entirely different view about the subject. The OP gave me a feeling that he had put little effort into considering the situation from an outside perspective. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18870 Posts
On April 16 2013 04:09 CecilSunkure wrote: Yeah I agree, I just think it's healthy to hear an entirely different view about the subject. The OP gave me a feeling that he had put little effort into considering the situation from an outside perspective. Ahh yes, well in reference to the OP what you are saying makes more sense. Thanks for the clarification. | ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
And we can all agree that the cheaters could have easily not-cheated and passed. It's not like laziness isn't the only reason people cheated. The whole "I might ruin lives" thing sounds like a very narrow and immature perspective that gleams with arrogance. What did he expect? He was looking for dirt. He was searching to "ruin a life". | ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
| ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
From the personal perspective, you do have your friend on the line in this situation. You say that you know him, but I'm not sure how close you guys are. For me, I will give my friends a certain degree of freedom if they commit crimes. If I found out that my friend is committing some crimes, my actions would depend on how severe it is. If it's something small, I wouldn't care, heck I do stuff like downloading music and jaywalking. If it's something bigger, like stealing a TV, I would definitely talk to them about it, but wouldn't turn them in. They would have to do something like rape in order for me to turn them in. I'm sure this applies to a lot of people. So depending on if that person is an important person to you, you have to make a hard choice on this one. From a non-personal perspective, there are people committing crimes that could cause a great deal of harm. You are not ruining anyone's life by doing this, because when people are cheating, they become under-qualified for their profession, which in turn brings more harm, and to innocent people instead. Don't judge this situation by how much you hate the person doing this. Also don't put into consideration that he's cheating on his girlfriend. That's his personal life, it's not illegal, so it's completely irrelevant. So what I would recommend to you is to access his email again, and then forward all the emails to the dean or whoever. Everyone who cheated will get exactly what they should get. The person will get fired, maybe worse. Everyone who cheated will fail the course, and depending on what the dean decides, they may be given another chance, or they may get expelled, in which case they will be seeking alternative career options that are within their level of expertise, so they don't have to cheat. One thing that you should also learn from this experience is that you shouldn't be accessing someone's private email. If you are able to hate someone so much that you are doing illegal thing to harm them, then you have serious problems. Don't do it ever again. | ||
|
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9179 Posts
On April 16 2013 04:17 Aerisky wrote: Also unless he forwards that email using that person's account, it doesn't constitute felonious fraud or identity theft AFAIK and would merely be a misdemeanor-- unauthorized access to a computer (despite the access just being to an email account; this is just based on the circumstances around the Palin hacker). Not all felonies are the same though, same with misdemeanors. Legal severity in and of itself is distinct from moral rectitude. Doesn't make it any less sleazy or deplorable, however. Ultimately it's up to the op. Felony or not, people inciting other people to commit these acts and, furthermore, whiteknighting the person for doing so isn't what I expect from people on Team Liquid. | ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
On April 16 2013 04:57 itsjustatank wrote: Felony or not, people inciting other people to commit these acts and, furthermore, whiteknighting the person for doing so isn't what I expect from people on Team Liquid. I don't recall anyone whiteknighting anyone else. However I do think that a pragmatic approach to making the best of a poor situation is a course of action to consider. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18870 Posts
On April 16 2013 04:57 itsjustatank wrote: Felony or not, people inciting other people to commit these acts and, furthermore, whiteknighting the person for doing so isn't what I expect from people on Team Liquid. Of all the people to poorly use a shitty internet meme like "whiteknighting", I would have hoped it would not be a TL writer........ | ||
|
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9179 Posts
No party here should get off scot-free. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18870 Posts
On April 16 2013 05:06 itsjustatank wrote: It is being used in the original sense of the term. You are suggesting he can still do some justice by continuing to do illegal acts simply because of a moral sense of duty. None of you are further saying the responsible thing afterwards, that this person should turn themselves in to the authorities according to the same code of morals. Vigilantism is the white knight to its logical extreme. No party here should get off scot-free. I'm not sure what sort of strangely rigid conception of morality you are referencing here, but that people have an inconsistent approach to individual morality ought not surprise you, lest you blame the sun for rising. It's clear you have very definite ideas in mind when you use the words "justice", "moral sense of duty", and "same code of morals". On what basis can you claim their universality, and on what basis are we to bend to your judgement in regards to the adherence of these universals? I do not believe individual morality needs to coincide directly along the lines of civically posited "right" action. Prove me wrong. "No Party should get off scot-free" Says who? The code of morals you say we all must adhere to? | ||
|
FryBender
United States290 Posts
| ||
|
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9179 Posts
On April 16 2013 05:40 farvacola wrote: I'm not sure what sort of strangely rigid conception of morality you are referencing here, but that people have an inconsistent approach to individual morality ought not surprise you, lest you blame the sun for rising. It's clear you have very definite ideas in mind when you use the words "justice", "moral sense of duty", and "same code of morals". On what basis can you claim their universality, and on what basis are we to bend to your judgement in regards to the adherence of these universals? I do not believe individual morality needs to coincide directly along the lines of civically posited "right" action. Prove me wrong. "No Party should get off scot-free" Says who? The code of morals you say we all must adhere to? This isn't a place for philosophical debate. The law, in whatever jurisdiction the OP resides in, more than likely isolates illegal computer access as more grave than academic dishonesty. Incitement to do these acts and incitement to commit blackmail is also an offense in multiple jurisdictions. You can rationalize it to yourself however you wish. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18870 Posts
On April 16 2013 05:49 itsjustatank wrote: This isn't a place for philosophical debate. The law, in whatever jurisdiction the OP resides in, more than likely isolates illegal computer access as more grave than academic dishonesty. Incitement to do these acts and incitement to commit blackmail is also an offense in multiple jurisdictions. You can rationalize it to yourself however you wish. Well, so long as you're cognizant of the fact that you've just whiteknighted "the law", I think we're done here. I mean, come on, do you really think any of us need to tell this dude "hey, you're breaking the law."? | ||
|
Mothra
United States1448 Posts
On April 16 2013 05:40 farvacola wrote: I'm not sure what sort of strangely rigid conception of morality you are referencing here, but that people have an inconsistent approach to individual morality ought not surprise you, lest you blame the sun for rising. It's clear you have very definite ideas in mind when you use the words "justice", "moral sense of duty", and "same code of morals". On what basis can you claim their universality, and on what basis are we to bend to your judgement in regards to the adherence of these universals? I do not believe individual morality needs to coincide directly along the lines of civically posited "right" action. Prove me wrong. "No Party should get off scot-free" Says who? The code of morals you say we all must adhere to? If morality is individual, what right does one have to turn in the cheater? His morality is different than yours, after all. But if you turn him in on the grounds that what he did was morally wrong, then you are applying universal morality. Hence, unless you can say that hacking someone's personal email is not wrong then you should turn yourself in as well. | ||
|
itsjustatank
Hong Kong9179 Posts
On April 16 2013 05:52 farvacola wrote: Well, so long as you're cognizant of the fact that you've just whiteknighted "the law", I think we're done here. I mean, come on, do you really think any of us need to tell this dude "hey, you're breaking the law."? Yes, especially when intrinsic to your advocacy is the encouragement to re-do the crime (and, indeed, to commit blackmail). | ||
| ||
