Ashley Maddison Hack - WDYT?

applecruncher said:
You’ll have to (step down). Your “I must be alone” or whatever is inaccurate. You can stand by your ethics …that’s fine, :shrug: but it's beside the point. We're talking biscuits vs bread. You're acting like everyone is saying "Hey! What's the big deal? I think adultery is great!" You're trying to put words into various mouths, and it's not working.

I never said AM was ethical, and I’m not seeing where anyone else did. I also don’t need you to explain ethics (and I don't think anyone else in the thread does), especially in such a haughty tone.
Click to expand...

I will reread my posts but I have not accused anyone of thinking that adultery is great. It's Ashley Madison that attracts my ire because it celebrates adultery. This is not an ordinary hook up service - its targeted demographic is marrieds. I've seen the adverts on late night TV.

Apologies for the haughtiness.

My reference to ethics is because I don't regard this as a religious issue. It is an ethical one but not everyone understands what ethical thinking actually involves. It complex and I have to remind myself of the principles too.
 

tnthomas said:
I thought that all the cheaters and seekers of 'other' sexual encounters congregated on Craigslist, which is free. ?
Click to expand...
OK, I had a look at Craigslist, and apparently it is available in Sydney but I had to do a lot of work to do dig down. Many clicks and a Google map of the world to navigate. It's not reaching out to me through my TV and doesn't seem to want just married people. Also, it's not very appealing.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
I see your point about the cheaters but what about the business model that charges money for facilitating their weakness ?
Click to expand...

You mean like Nutrisystem, Weight Watchers and such? Fast-food franchises? Exotic sports cars?

Many businesses are based upon profiting from weakness - I worked in such a field for many years - self-defense training.
 
Does one form of exploitation excuse all others and is there a continuum of exploitation ? Or a field with harm/exploitation on one axis and benefit on the other. If there is, it would be possible to plot such businesses in quadrants marked - more good than harm, more harm than good, don't go there, etc.

Something like this

harm benefit grid 2.png
From my perspective, Ashley Madison is in the red zone. Others will see it differently of course. Weight Watchers I'd put in either mauve or green and fast food in mauve or red.
 
That's an interesting way of looking at it - I like that it includes several gray zones.

Still, isn't the particular box we put the business in question into colored by our perceptions?

For example, you place fast food into red. While I could almost agree with you, I would have to stop and think about all the people that live exclusively on a fast-food diet because they cannot afford anything more. Certainly that has some benefits?

Please don't ask me what benefits AM serves - there must be some, it's just too early in the AM to think of them. ;)
 
SifuPhil said:
That's an interesting way of looking at it - I like that it includes several gray zones.

Still, isn't the particular box we put the business in question into colored by our perceptions?

For example, you place fast food into red. While I could almost agree with you, I would have to stop and think about all the people that live exclusively on a fast-food diet because they cannot afford anything more. Certainly that has some benefits?

Please don't ask me what benefits AM serves - there must be some, it's just too early in the AM to think of them. ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, it is up to each individual to decide where they place the internal lines. There could be more gradations than just two on each axis. It was just an illustration concocted rather quickly to show how two competing values can be simultaneously addressed. For three values under consideration you need to think in 3D and plot them inside a box. Even then, the graphic doesn't make the decision for you. Ultimately you have to decide but the graphic may be an aid to clearer thinking.

If I had more internal divisions, I would probably place fast food somewhere between mauve and red - go there occasionally but not too often?
 
Dame Warrigal said:
... If I had more internal divisions, I would probably place fast food somewhere between mauve and red - go there occasionally but not too often?
Click to expand...

Well, there you go - maybe these people only cheat on their spouses once in a while? ;)

I just go with the philosophy that nothing is entirely good or bad - that there are gradations in everything. With that approach I cannot in good faith totally condemn them.
 
You still seem to think I am condemning the clients. I'm not. I'm affronted by Ashley Madison itself that has a business plan that directly attacks marriage. Call me old fashioned but I still believe that the institution marriage should be supported, not white anted for profit. It is pure bunkum to pretend that their business is improving marriages.
 
Wouldn't it improve a marriage (if it is already failing) by ending it?

And if you're affronted by the business plan, wouldn't you also be affronted by its participants?
 
I am affronted by people who knowingly set their cap at married people.

Regarding the first question. I have always taken any solemn vow I have made very seriously. I always said that I wouldn't cheat on my husband. If the marriage was broken I would leave him first before I ever took up with someone else. I did contemplate leaving several times. Who doesn't at some time? I got over it and recommitted.

My mother had a saying that applied to family: blood relations and marrieds both - she said we stick like poo to a blanket. One way to describe loyalty and commitment, I suppose.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
I am affronted by people who knowingly set their cap at married people.
Click to expand...

So you're not fond of solicitors? :eek:

Regarding the first question. I have always taken any solemn vow I have made very seriously. I always said that I wouldn't cheat on my husband. If the marriage was broken I would leave him first before I ever took up with someone else. I did contemplate leaving several times. Who doesn't at some time? I got over it and recommitted.
Click to expand...

All well and good - can you therefore have no mercy for a business that aims to help those that are "beyond hope"?

... or am I painting a barn with a toothpick? :rolleyes:

My mother had a saying that applied to family: blood relations and marrieds both - she said we stick like poo to a blanket. One way to describe loyalty and commitment, I suppose.
Click to expand...

And a colorful one. :D
 
SifuPhil said:
Well, there you go - maybe these people only cheat on their spouses once in a while? ;)

I just go with the philosophy that nothing is entirely good or bad - that there are gradations in everything. With that approach I cannot in good faith totally condemn them.
Click to expand...

I totally agree Phil I believe nothing in the universe is right or wrong, until we humans make it so by our subjectivity. Things happen or we create them and there are consequences, that's it as far as I am concerned.
 
merlin said:
I totally agree Phil I believe nothing in the universe is right or wrong, until we humans make it so by our subjectivity. Things happen or we create them and there are consequences, that's it as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...

And that's probably as simple and truthful a philosophy that you can find, in my opinion. :encouragement:
 
merlin said:
I totally agree Phil I believe nothing in the universe is right or wrong, until we humans make it so by our subjectivity. Things happen or we create them and there are consequences, that's it as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...

Sorry Merlin but I regard that as pure nonsense.

For example, if my neighbour throws trash on my lawn and I subsequently take a shotgun to his front window, am I to understand that my action is just a consequence of his action. It is not wrong from my point of view but he might think differently. Isn't that why we have laws to help and guide us?
 
But that's all subjective Dame, as are any laws, you have free choice if you believe that, so if you break one of your cultures laws there will be consequences.

You calling my truth nonsense is subjective as is Phil's agreement of my truth, no one has "The" truth, there isn't any in the universe, as far as I am concerned.

We each as individuals make up our own truth as does our particular culture, they are all different, but none are "The" truth, because there isn't one. IMO
 
Dame Warrigal said:
For example, if my neighbour throws trash on my lawn and I subsequently take a shotgun to his front window, am I to understand that my action is just a consequence of his action.
Click to expand...

Yes it is, because had he NOT thrown the trash you probably would not have shot his window. Simple cause and effect.

It is not wrong from my point of view but he might think differently. Isn't that why we have laws to help and guide us?
Click to expand...

Laws are merely the results of a few people's ideas on what is "right" and "wrong" - again, open to interpretation. They are accepted by the majority and enforced by a minority.
 
Hmm. Torn here, not pro adultery, monogamy, serial or otherwise works for me. But, in my view, the morality question is around the privacy issue. Hackers had no right to attempt to extort compliance. Adultery is not illegal. Re the all truths are subjective. Hmm. Slippery slope, I get free will and consequence. By the same token, I believe some truths to be universal. I believe it is wrong to abuse children etc. I am not an anarchist, and am not comfortable with the I can do whatever I wish philosophy. I think it is so easy to paint anything we don't like as a construct. I have never been anything but eccentric, have few absolutes, but there are one or two. Otherwise what is the point of any attempt to live a meaningful life?
 
WhatInThe said:
Let's say just one million of those have a 200 dollar consultation with a lawyer. That's 200 million dollars for the lawyers. I guess that's one way to stimulate the economy.
Click to expand...

Turn off that calculator. Initial consultations are usually free.

1) btw, it should be kept in mind that many AM clients are women.

2) People who use AM services most likely have cheated before.

3) Do you really think as soon as a spouse finds out the other party has used AM they will run to a lawyer and prepare for a divorce? Mmmmm, some might but most.. probably not. Many people stay with an unfaithful spouse for any number of reasons.
 
"Turn off that calculator. Initial consultations are usually free."

Maybe with personal injury lawyers, but NOT divorce lawyers. Not around here, anyway. AND, they usually want a fat retainer before they will tell you anything at all.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top