Hey Everyone, Let's Dial Back the Creepiness

[Whoosh]

4 minutes ago, OldFadedStar said:

Would it be just as creepy if someone gave our their personal number?  The impression i got from the burner phone conversation would be to let someone in that area know that the duggars were there instead of posting it online. 

This was your response to my post where I said the following.  Not sure what the confusion is here, but now worries.  I do get what you are saying, I just see things a bit differently.

 

7 minutes ago, Whoosh said:

 I thought the purpose of the burner phones were so that people could keep in communication with someone who was going out to the airfield when it was thought the Duggars were landing - is that not correct?

 

[MatthewDuggar]

Yay, I learned something new!  I had never heard the term "burner phone" before.

Going back under my rock....

[OldFadedStar]

1 minute ago, MatthewDuggar said:

Yay, I learned something new!  I had never heard the term "burner phone" before.

Going back under my rock....

I knew of the concept before but never heard of the term "burner phone" until FJ

[Arete]

I don't see why someone who wants to protect themselves from potentially creepy stalkers on FJ by not giving their actual phone out thinks it's OK to work with these potentially creepy stalkers to track the Duggar plane.  I don't care how far out Jim Bob has put his family.  He gets the same consideration trying to protect his family as the person wanting to protect their phone number.  

[HerNameIsBuffy]

5 hours ago, AreteJo said:

I don't see why someone who wants to protect themselves from potentially creepy stalkers on FJ by not giving their actual phone out thinks it's OK to work with these potentially creepy stalkers to track the Duggar plane.  I don't care how far out Jim Bob has put his family.  He gets the same consideration trying to protect his family as the person wanting to protect their phone number.  

That's the point.  No, it wouldn't have been better if she had posted her personal number...it's the tracking of people irl so people can head out and stalk them physically that's the problem.

The fact that it was a burner phone just points to the hypocrisy of protecting their own privacy in the act of violating others.  And it would be stupid to post one's own phone number - no one would suggest that.  

 

[Rescinded and Mended]

10 hours ago, MatthewDuggar said:

Yay, I learned something new!  I had never heard the term "burner phone" before.

Going back under my rock....

That was a first for me, as well. I've always heard them referred to as "hooker phones."

[NotAnIncubator]

On 1/7/2016 at 3:47 AM, InThePrayerCloset said:

Yes i mentioned that I was an attorney and would be paranoid about discussing confidential and potentially criminal matters over the telephone due to interception, even if they were using burner phones. I put this kind of attorney confidentiality concern as a reason why there may be so many flights to Rockford atm. (though i doubt those flights were used for transporting his legal term)

I didn't advocate the stake out of the Rockford airport or the use of burners as a clandestine communication method amongst FJ members....

I read where the post they were referring to and I agree burner phones are a bit much. Nobody needs to go that far, and it makes me a little nervous that you're using burner phones whole trying to find Joshly. Like... Wtf? 

[lascuba]

It's been a busy week for me so I missed this. Burner phones? Going to airports in the hopes of spotting a Duggar? Guys, don't do that. Forget about the Duggars' feelings and right to privacy...I agree in the general sense that they don't get to complain about lack of privacy when their whole premise is that they're putting their lives out there as a ministry. I have zero compassion for them in that regard. But think about what that stalker behavior says about you. No matter who the targets are, it says something disturbing that you would track their movements so closely.

[nomoxian]

On Friday, January 08, 2016 at 7:09 AM, OldFadedStar said:

I knew of the concept before but never heard of the term "burner phone" until FJ

I think most people use it in a negative light... like my phone is technically a burner phone. There's no contract and it's not tied to my name or bank account. But most people would only call it a "burner phone" if I were using it for a few weeks to do *whatever* and then get a new SIM card.

[Queen Of Hearts]

No offense to any of you, but if I had reason to talk to anyone on FJ I would provide a burner number.  We are all strangers here (unless we've met in real life, which is rare).  None of us knows if the people we chat with here are really who they represent themselves as.  Too much personal and identifying info can be obtained through phone numbers.  I see nothing creepy about that.  Frankly, it's just being safe.

 

As far as Duggar spotting at the airports, I found it kind of amusing.  In fact, I joked that any FJ who takes a picture ought to sell it to the tabloids - turn about is fair play considering how many stories the tabloids have generated after reading here.  I'd never advocate trespassing on private property, or even approaching a "celebrity", but if someone wants to hang around a public place in the hopes of spotting someone famous, so be it.  

 

ETA - I have never stalked a Duggar plane, or any plane for that matter, but do not judge those that did.

 

[Whoosh]

Just now, Queen Of Hearts said:

No offense to any of you, but if I had reason to talk to anyone on FJ I would provide a burner number.  We are all strangers here (unless we've met in real life, which is rare).  None of us knows if the people we chat with here are really who they represent themselves as.  Too much personal and identifying info can be obtained through phone numbers.  I see nothing creepy about that.  Frankly, it's just being safe.

 

As far as Duggar spotting at the airports, I found it kind of amusing.  In fact, I joked that any FJ who takes a picture ought to sell it to the tabloids - turn about is fair play considering how many stories the tabloids have generated after reading here.  I'd never advocate trespassing on private property, or even approaching a "celebrity", but if someone wants to hang around a public place in the hopes of spotting someone famous, so be it.  

So... you are hanging out with a group of people who may be creepy - best to not let out your number.  I agree!  Totally.

And you are going to create a burner number so that those questionable people can be on premises the MOMENT the Duggar family travels?  Got it.

[Queen Of Hearts]

9 minutes ago, Whoosh said:

So... you are hanging out with a group of people who may be creepy - best to not let out your number.  I agree!  Totally.

And you are going to create a burner number so that those questionable people can be on premises the MOMENT the Duggar family travels?  Got it.

It's not about calling anyone creepy.  It's about being safe.  

[Whoosh]

Just now, Queen Of Hearts said:

It's not about calling anyone creepy.  It's about being safe.  

Can the Duggars be safe?  No?

[Queen Of Hearts]

1 minute ago, Whoosh said:

Can the Duggars be safe?  No?

1.) They chose to become 'celebrities.'  They chose to make their lives public and to make the public interested in their lives.  As a result, they also have to know that when in a public location they are no longer anonymous.  

2.) They chose to fly their private, easily identifiable plane.

3.) They chose (until recently) to keep their flight paths public.

4.) They were never not safe - to the best of my knowledge, no FJ plane spotter ever caused a Duggar any harm.  

[Whoosh]

ETA - I KNOW that this person I am talking to may be a perv or crazed stalker.  I am not stupid.  That is why I am using a fake number.  I am sending them to make REAL WORLD CONTACT with the Duggar family as we speak.

Nothing creepy about that.

Just now, Queen Of Hearts said:

1.) They chose to become 'celebrities.'  They chose to make their lives public and to make the public interested in their lives.  As a result, they also have to know that when in a public location they are no longer anonymous.  

2.) They chose to fly their private, easily identifiable plane.

3.) They chose (until recently) to keep their flight paths public.

4.) They were never not safe - to the best of my knowledge, no FJ plane spotter ever caused a Duggar any harm.  

This has been discussed.  Some will feel they "asked for it" - there won't.  Valid point of disagreement.

Would you be comfortable if I started posting the GPS coordinates from your car?  Just curious.

[Queen Of Hearts]

8 minutes ago, Whoosh said:

Would you be comfortable if I started posting the GPS coordinates from your car?  Just curious.

I wouldn't be comfortable with that, which is why I chose not to be a celebrity and live my life on reality TV.  Additionally, since car paths are not publicly tracked, if you knew my GPS coordinates you would have gotten them through illegal measures and not by monitoring a public tracking site, as FJ members did with Flight Aware.  Your scenario above, frankly, doesn't apply here.

 

Look, I get what you are saying and I can respect your thoughts on the subject.  But it also makes me sad to see the hand slapping being done to the members here who went to the airport in the hopes of spotting a Duggar.  They did nothing wrong - nothing illegal or even in violation of FJ's TOS. The plane's whereabouts was always publicly known. They plane spotters were always on public property.  And ultimately, the Duggar's themselves (finally) put an end to it by choosing to go private.  Frankly, I question why they waited so long.

[Whoosh]

Just now, Queen Of Hearts said:

I wouldn't be comfortable with that, which is why I chose not to be a celebrity and live my life on reality TV.  Additionally, since car paths are not publicly tracked, if you knew my GPS coordinates you would have gotten them through illegal measures and not by monitoring a public tracking site, as FJ members did with Flight Aware.  Your scenario above, frankly, doesn't apply here.

 

Look, I get what you are saying and I can respect your thoughts on the subject.  But it also makes me sad to see the hand slapping being done to the members here who went to the airport in the hopes of spotting a Duggar.  They did nothing wrong - nothing illegal or even in violation of FJ's TOS. The plane's whereabouts was always publicly known. They plane spotters were always on public property.  And ultimately, the Duggar's themselves (finally) put an end to it by choosing to go private.  Frankly, I question why they waited so long.

[CyborgKin]

1 hour ago, Whoosh said:

ETA - I KNOW that this person I am talking to may be a perv or crazed stalker.  I am not stupid.  That is why I am using a fake number.  I am sending them to make REAL WORLD CONTACT with the Duggar family as we speak.

Nothing creepy about that.

Just so I'm clear, the part I've bolded is sarcasm, yes?

[Whoosh]

Just now, CyborgKin said:

Just so I'm clear, the part I've bolded is sarcasm, yes?

uh....

totally. that is creepy.  BUT, people didn't start out to do that.  It grows from "nothing weird here"

[GodsKnickers]

I'm going to have to read this whole damn thread and the Duggars Go Fly one as well, aren't I? sigh Making me work. Jeebus.

[desertvixen]

I apparently need to read more in the Duggar forums if there's stories about people getting arrested... Usually, I stay more in Snark.

Agree though that actually tracking and trying to meet them in public (not at an event they're attending as celebrities) is a little over the top.

[VelociRapture]

14 hours ago, desertvixen said:

I apparently need to read more in the Duggar forums if there's stories about people getting arrested... Usually, I stay more in Snark.

Agree though that actually tracking and trying to meet them in public (not at an event they're attending as celebrities) is a little over the top.

The arrest was a while ago - probably a few years now and I'm pretty sure the member involved is no longer around here now.

If people here want to interact with any of the people discussed here or runs into them unexpectedly I would suggest an abundance of caution. Don't mention the site at all (you aren't representing all the members here), don't be stupid (like mentioning you're going to do something blatantly illegal ahead of time on this very public forum), and be respectful (for instance, only attend public events and use your manners if you do happen to bump into them around town). 

Most importantly, anyone who wants to interact with these Fundies needs to remember that they are still human beings despite their horrible teachings. The kids especially don't deserve to be harassed by random strangers as they go about their lives.

And I totally agree with you. Purposely tracking them with the intent to meet them in person and harass them somehow is over the line. I do understand no one in this situation was looking to harm them in anyway at all and I do think it was just curiosity to know what was happening with Josh, but I feel stating that is important - it can be very easy to have things escalate unintentionally.

[Srilaura]

I don't think it's wrong or creepy to attempt to discredit, with proof, any scam artist. Being on TV just gives scammers a bigger audience and more opportunities to scam. Doesn't give them any special protection. People do a lot of projecting when deciding the motives of others. 

On January 6, 2016 at 1:36 PM, singsingsing said:

So we want to be like the paparazzi now?

The paparazzi does it for $$$ and money alone. It's their job. HUGE difference. Obviously. 

[Redandbluenights]

On 1/6/2016 at 4:53 PM, singsingsing said:

PSA: If your neighbour is keeping a spreadsheet on your kids, pointing cameras at your house, and coming on your property to check your hydro meter, you might want to call the police.

As a (now retired) police officer who has taken this EXACT type of call- neighbors recording videos of every time they come and go, etc etc etc- there's nothing we can do. 

You have no expectation of privacy in almost all places outside your home, and inside your home is only private of you have blinds.  (If you decide to walk around naked eating your fruit loops, someone is going to take your picture and or complain) 

We get a LOT of these calls after neighbor disputes turn into all out wars, at least one of which I responded to that escalated to a shooting... 

But as it was stated above "creepy" doesn't equal criminal stalking. No matter how ethically wrong it feels. 

 

PS. They are called burner phones because they are hard to track (since the buyer needs to present no personal info to activate the phone.)- it can then be used once and that number is "burnt" once you've used it to demand random, to buy drugs, etc etc- anything you don't want tired to you. 

As a real cop, we called them "pay-as you go phones" but the TV term is burner phone and since departments have started to say it. 

[singsingsing]

10 minutes ago, Redandbluenights said:

As a (now retired) police officer who has taken this EXACT type of call- neighbors recording videos of every time they come and go, etc etc etc- there's nothing we can do. 

You have no expectation of privacy in almost all places outside your home, and inside your home is only private of you have blinds.  (If you decide to walk around naked eating your fruit loops, someone is going to take your picture and or complain) 

We get a LOT of these calls after neighbor disputes turn into all out wars, at least one of which I responded to that escalated to a shooting... 

But as it was stated above "creepy" doesn't equal criminal stalking. No matter how ethically wrong it feels. 

Yes, there's nothing you can do insomuch as you can't arrest the person, but you can take a report to document the ongoing issue. This can be extremely helpful to the injured party (if there is one) should the harassment escalate. Also, the issue under discussion here involves someone essentially stalking children. I know for a fact that the police (at least in my jurisdiction) will investigate if someone is filming minors.