Hackers to Ashley Madison website: Pay up or we reveal the name of all your cheaters!

[DeadPresident]

With all the pro-adulterer reactions in this thread, I am starting to wonder if some of our forum members' e-mails aren't in that leak.

Either that, or they don't want a bunch of wet blankets killing their dreams of being able to cheat on their future spouses without being morally accountable. You know, healthy interpersonal behaviour and all.

No, but neither is having them account for their actions to the whole world. These things should be kept between people to whom it pertains.

What? So they can do what they like behind closed doors with other adulterers and then if their objectively reprehensible behaviour should become public then it's time to show mercy on them? Lol. If your significant other was busy getting her fields irrigated by some other person wouldn't you like to know about it, instead of walking through life like some chump?

Well, they burned that bridge when they signed up to a massive online website in the era of mass hackings.

But hey, at least his credit card information is safe. Kind of sad that Ashley Madison is better at keeping your financial data safe than Sony or Target.

But hey, those divorce lawyers won't pay themselves.

Nah, we need services like this Next we can have a site for aspiring pedophiles and murders.

And God help anyone who doesn't think people should be allowed to do whatever the **** they want on the interwebz.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

The release of this information does nothing but hurt individuals not the company. Regardless of where you stand on the website services itself literally thousands of lives could potentially be ruined from this. So these moral crusaders who hacked into Ashley Madison haven't achieved much, in fact their actions are only going to hurt the users. Those people who sign up to that site don't deserve to be publicly named and shamed, they've committed no crime.

But just because something isn't a crime doesn't mean it's morally acceptable.

And maybe the hackers did these people a favor. Who wants to stuck with someone cheating on them? I'd like to know the truth, myself.

 

[Greens]

Either that, or they don't want a bunch of wet blankets killing their dreams of being able to cheat on their future spouses without being morally accountable. You know, healthy interpersonal behaviour and all.

I am now a Hype-certified adulterer.

What? So they can do what they like behind closed doors with other adulterers and then if their objectively reprehensible behaviour should become public then it's time to show mercy on them? Lol. If your significant other was busy getting her fields irrigated by some other person wouldn't you like to know about it, instead of walking through life like some chump?

I'm not siding with the adulterers. I want their spouses to divorce them.

I just don't think that all bets are off when it comes to exposing their behavior. Not everyone who cheats on their girlfriend/wife/whatever is a monster who should have that mistake chained to their feet for the rest of their lives.

Nah, we need services like this Next we can have a site for aspiring pedophiles and murders.

Are you really gonna go with that ridiculous slippery slope?

Again, I am not pro-adultery. Jesus Christ. The Hype really suffers from black-white syndrome sometimes.

 

[Evelisse]

I'm still fine with all of this. Cheaters friends and family have a right to know how ****** a person the cheater is.

 

[DeadPresident]

I am now a Hype-certified adulterer.

Duly noted, I'm warning my wife about you.

I'm not siding with the adulterers. I want their spouses to divorce them.

I just don't think that all bets are off when it comes to exposing their behavior. Not everyone who cheats on their girlfriend/wife/whatever is a monster who should have that mistake chained to their feet for the rest of their lives.

I agree all bets shouldn't be off, but I'm not going to get up in arms about it in this instance. Should anybody be able to hack anything they want at any stage? No, of course not. Is info theft a little more acceptable if it happens to people who are guilty of some morally unacceptable behaviour themselves? In my view, yes. That's called karma.

Are you really gonna go with that ridiculous slippery slope?

Again, I am not pro-adultery. Jesus Christ. The Hype really suffers from black-white syndrome sometimes.

Well this is how things become worse. People become comfortable with small shifts in the wrong direction one step at a time. All I'm saying is people forfeit the right to lecture anyone else about morality when they're deliberately engaged something immoral themselves.

My view is it's morally grey to me when someone does something less unethical to someone else doing something unethical in response. Don't be so black and white about it, Jesus Christ.

 

[jmc]

But just because something isn't a crime doesn't mean it's morally acceptable.

And maybe the hackers did these people a favor. Who wants to stuck with someone cheating on them? I'd like to know the truth, myself.

That's not for you or for them to decide. What's morally acceptable is subjective.

 

[chaseter]

lol at the people in here sympathizing over cheaters' information being leaked. What a world we live in.

 

[Greens]

I agree all bets shouldn't be off, but I'm not going to get up in arms about it in this instance.

Oh, me neither. I just learned about this incident. I'm not gonna think about it for one second outside of this discussion. I just thought jmc brought up some good points.

 

[DeadPresident]

That's not for you or for them to decide. What's morally acceptable is subjective.

Where's the boundary? Because moral relativity is a very dangerous concept. If you open up the possibility to small things don't be surprised when they morph into bigger ones. Certain things, like it or not, are morally unacceptable objectively. If we take what you say in bold as an absolute statement you can't complain if I break into your house and steal what you own and murder you with a smile on my face...I mean it's subjective right? Or do we draw the line somewhere?

This is a no-brainer, and moral relativity certainly doesn't belong in this discussion.

 

[DeadPresident]

Oh, me neither. I just learned about this incident. I'm not gonna think about it for one second outside of this discussion. I just thought jmc brought up some good points.

I understand what you're saying. If it was a simple transaction of Adulterers info leaked => Identities revealed, and it stopped there I'd say it is 100% acceptable. But obviously it can lead to other things that may be more harmful, like some psychotic husband murdering his wife and her side-dude because he finds out about. Now, do adulterers deserve to be murdered for their indiscretions? No, of course not, so I can't condone all resulting actions from the fallout from the information possibly being released. But what I can condone is people facing the consequences for their behaviour.

And if that means losing your wife or house or your kids hating you because you knowingly behaved in such a manner, people really should've taken this kind of possibility into account before betraying people they made a commitment to. By jmc's logic we have no place to judge them because their behaviour is morally subjective, which is absolute bull**** because then anyone can use it as a copout to justify anything they want.

 

[Greens]

Depends on how you look at it. Morality is subjective, but as a society we have decided that certain things are right and wrong. In that sense, morality is objective.

If morality was objective, history would not look the same.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Free will. It's a mother******. Just be prepared for the consequences of your actions.

 

[DeadPresident]

Depends on how you look at it. Morality is subjective, but as a society we have decided that certain things are right and wrong. In that sense, morality is objective.

If morality was objective, history would not look the same.

Sure, and that's a loaded discussion I'll grant you, but certain things need to be on a list of **** you don't do unless there are highly unique mitigating circumstances.

I struggle to think of when adultery is permissible, but it sure as **** isn't because someone has some kind of fetish about cheating on their spouse. I agree a moral "ideal" doesn't technically exist, but I'd be quite discouraged if it wasn't a social norm that people should try and get as close to it as possible. Because if it's moving in the current direction of more and more things becoming acceptable and blasé, why are we messing around with law and crap at all? If people are going to be controlled by primal instinct let's drop all pretense and just go back to pre-biblical times where if someone has something you want you take it from them by force

 

[Greens]

If people are going to be controlled by primal instinct let's drop all pretense and just go back to pre-biblical times where if someone has something you want you take it from them by force

Polygamy was acceptable back then! I could go for a nice harem. Dibs on Margot Robbie.

 

[Knight-Tale]

Some dumb people used their work email too apparently so if they used the same password a few companies will be compromised big time.

 

[DeadPresident]

Polygamy was acceptable back then! I could go for a nice harem. Dibs on Margot Robbie.

Well so was bashing someone's head in with a rock if you didn't like how he was looking at your girl...so you and a few other hypesters will be fighting to the death for her Judging by how some hypesters feel about this they'd be cool with some headbashery commencing

 

[BestGirl]

The Josh Duggar info is kind of hilar though I feel so sorry for his wife.

The release of this information does nothing but hurt individuals not the company. Regardless of where you stand on the website services itself literally thousands of lives could potentially be ruined from this. So these moral crusaders who hacked into Ashley Madison haven't achieved much, in fact their actions are only going to hurt the users. Those people who sign up to that site don't deserve to be publicly named and shamed, they've committed no crime.

It most certainly does hurt Ashley Madison. How many people are going to sign up for their site now, knowing that their personal info could be compromised?

And just because you've committed no crime doesn't mean you don't deserve to be publicly named and shamed. I mean, we're talking about adulterers here.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I feel little sympathy for Duggar's wife. She know the kind of person he is by now.

 

[Sawyer]

I feel little sympathy for Duggar's wife. She know the kind of person he is by now.

Exactly. F*** her. The only people I feel sorry for in that family are the kids too young to know they're being indoctrinated into that family's bulls*** beliefs.

 

[jmc]

Where's the boundary? Because moral relativity is a very dangerous concept. If you open up the possibility to small things don't be surprised when they morph into bigger ones. Certain things, like it or not, are morally unacceptable objectively. If we take what you say in bold as an absolute statement you can't complain if I break into your house and steal what you own and murder you with a smile on my face...I mean it's subjective right? Or do we draw the line somewhere?

This is a no-brainer, and moral relativity certainly doesn't belong in this discussion.

That's a crime as determined by society, cheating isn't a crime, at least not in Western society.

 

[DeadPresident]

That's a crime as determined by society, cheating isn't a crime, at least not in Western society.

Now you're appealing to law, not morality. Society has also deemed that adultery is immoral, though not legally enforceable. Something can be legal, yet immoral (Banning gay marriage for example?), or it can be moral yet illegal (assisted suicide in some countries).

If you're going to appeal to law need I remind you at one stage slavery was "legal", so was hunting aborigines, in some parts of the world stoning your female relative is legal (and culturally encouraged) if she has sex out of wedlock. Trusting the moral composition of a nation to the bell curve of society is one of the dumbest things I can imagine.

Law and morality are distinctly separate concepts, and as I mentioned in some other thread, I'm highly disturbed by the notion that people will find things permissible if some higher authority makes it so. Everyone, in their heart of hearts, knows what's right and wrong. Deceiving someone who you are married to, someone you made a legally binding commitment to, and trying to hide behind the law is one of the most cowardly things I can imagine. Anybody that can do that and sleep well at night deserves whatever is coming to them. Again I have to ask, how would you feel if this was you being deceived? Still so morally relative? That level of deceit is immoral, and whether or not our society deems it legal or not is irrelevant, I'd hope most people would aim a little higher than the low bar provided for them by the lowest common denominator.

 

[jmc]

It most certainly does hurt Ashley Madison. How many people are going to sign up for their site now, knowing that their personal info could be compromised?

And just because you've committed no crime doesn't mean you don't deserve to be publicly named and shamed. I mean, we're talking about adulterers here.

Of course they don't, it's a private matter. The slippery slope your advocating is that everyone is fair game even if they screw up, this society were creating now is one where no-one is allowed to make an error anymore or say something even remotely insensitive lest they wish to risk their lives being ruined by having their details publicly plastered over every social media platform there is. People are losing jobs, reputations and livelihood for things they are doing in private or for errors they make because people take offence to it. That is a society that should worry everyone because it means, you, me, everyone on the Hype, everyone on the web is at risk of having something they do or say come back to haunt them, maybe even cost them everything, or worse if they are not mentally stable enough, their lives.

 

[Thundercrack85]

That's not for you or for them to decide. What's morally acceptable is subjective.

It is now.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It is now.

It always has been.

 

[jmc]

Now you're appealing to law, not morality. Society has also deemed that adultery is immoral, though not legally enforceable. Something can be legal, yet immoral (Banning gay marriage for example?), or it can be moral yet illegal (assisted suicide in some countries).

If you're going to appeal to law need I remind you at one stage slavery was "legal", so was hunting aborigines, in some parts of the world stoning your female relative is legal (and culturally encouraged) if she has sex out of wedlock. Trusting the moral composition of a nation to the bell curve of society is one of the dumbest things I can imagine.

Law and morality are distinctly separate concepts, and as I mentioned in some other thread, I'm highly disturbed by the notion that people will find things permissible if some higher authority makes it so. Everyone, in their heart of hearts, knows what's right and wrong. Deceiving someone who you are married to, someone you made a legally binding commitment to, and trying to hide behind the law is one of the most cowardly things I can imagine. Anybody that can do that and sleep well at night deserves whatever is coming to them. Again I have to ask, how would you feel if this was you being deceived? Still so morally relative?

If I was being deceived by someone I wouldn't want the entire world knowing about it. That matter is for me and me alone to deal with.