Here is my problem with you stance. As I understand it, OCR did live by the golden rule. He wasnt nice to people, but when the request was made he provided the details about his/her own purchase. You make it seem like as soon as he bought he tried to hide it, but didnt want other people to hide. I dont know, but I believe it unlikly, that OCR ever tried to SUE someone who purchased a house. There is a world of difference between badmouthing someones decisions with public facts on a public forum, and attempting to sue someone to hurt them financially. He was willing to provide the details about his purchase, and I have to believe that he realized that it could end up on a blog somewhere (hopefully without outing him) and analized. Only when financial ruin was brought into the picture did he stop. Was OCR ever directly responsible for bringing financial ruin on the subjects of on of his stories?
The golden rule is great and all, but in the course of public discourse, the censurship of “you were not nice to me” cannot be tollerated if we are to have a truthful discussion.
And T4L, I would also like to hear how OCR created a lack of creditability using public facts. Ethics is debateable, cause your ethics and mine can be very different. But creditablility says that the guy isnt believeable, or most commonly called lying, and I am curios how you came up with that charge.
