Subject: Re: Is this question ...
Author:
Posted on: 2011-02-20 22:59:00 UTC
Hmmm, well I guess it's better to be a lurker than a stalker. Despite that fact, and many sands of time having past since my last post, I shall now endeavor to return to activity, and maybe even think about actually doing the whole permissions thing eventually.
How long do you have to lurk silently in the background before it's classed as stalking?
To officially be classified as 'criminal menace' (the legalese term for stalking) the person in question must harass or follow the person or people in question three or more times with malicious intent before they can be charged. Socially, of course, things are generally less lenient; just a single occasion, even without malice, even without intent, can cause someone to be labeled a stalker. But all this, of course, is provided it's in person. On the Internet, of course, there's nothing to stop it from going on indefinately.
However, I get the sense that that has absolutely nothing to do with what you're asking, and that I'm just taking the opportunity to use Wikipedia to be pretentious. I do that sometimes (read; too much). You're asking because you've posted exactly two things on here, your introduction and a call for help when the BBC Sherlock Holmes forum attacked you for suggesting...cooperation with the PPC? Something like that. Anyway, putting my not-inconsiderable research skills aside for the moment (alas), I shall spake my response thusly:
I also lurked for quite some time before I worked up the courage to introduce myself (three years, actually) and I think I understand your plight. You seem to feel that you have nothing to contribute to our dear organization, and have therefore not contributed any of what you in fact could. This viewpoint is weighing you down. You have put these shackles on, and so you can take them off yourself. When you're ready, I have no doubt that you will. However, I'm in no position to make judgements on this, and in any case, I may be full of **** with my whole theory.
The point is, I think, that you should follow your bliss, my friend. I wish you well where'ere the winds of fate shall blow you. Ciao, my dear.
BBC Sherlock Holmes? What? Um, no, that appears a case of, mistaken wotsits. Identi-crisps. I don't recall that in the slightest. I posted a fair bit for probably a two month period 12-18 months ago, somewhen, and have dipped in and out since. Figured I'd now burst back in again and cause a little havoc.
Someone else seems to be going by the same username as you, then. Neeever mind anything that I just said then, for I have officially made a complete ass of myself...Ah, well. Can't be helped now, I suppose. Welcome back, my newfound friend, and please excuse my previously idiotic demeanor.
I don't think 'meta' is the kind of name that is unique across the entirety of the interwebs :P
Not unique? Really? I am shocked. Shocked to my very core.
Well, I think idiotic demeanor is a tad harsh, and to be fair there's plenty to share around. Now I just got to figure out how to kill off whoever is using my name.
She was going by Metaburo Fanmaker, IIRC.
I did look back through the messages and yes, it wasn't just plain Meta. Although, I couldn't find the messages from more than a year ago. I was trying to find the last messages I actually posted in here before vanishing.
board related, fic related or real life related?
My dictionary says a lurker does not participate and a stalker showers someone with obsessive and unwanted attention. A lurker to the extreme can thus not be classified as stalker, because that would mean the lurker had started taking action. Which is quite the opposite of what the lurker had been doing.
Hmmm, well I guess it's better to be a lurker than a stalker. Despite that fact, and many sands of time having past since my last post, I shall now endeavor to return to activity, and maybe even think about actually doing the whole permissions thing eventually.