The Jailhouse

[CharleyMike]

If I may weigh in here:

<<I appreciated the fact that Matt left out the details, because it shows me that in his position he respects confidentiality. If I the victim, want to discuss the matter and shed light, then all well and good. But it really wasn't his place to mention those issues that I may not have been comfortable with.>>

complicated issues in there. I agree in re: Matt's respecting confidentiality and the discussion of light shedding by the "victim".

But~ when management makes summary judgement and expels a member in secret, it behooves management to offer sufficient explanation to the remaining members. This should be done in sufficient detail to eliminate any concern by the remaining members.

In this particular instance, we probably would have easily accepted:" Joe sent attacking e-mail to one of our members after obtaining that e-mail address from that members Ihub profile, attempted, or threatened to, hack into that member's off-site e-mail account, threatened retribution if that member continued to disagree with him. So, after review of the facts and confirmation, I have terminated his account."

No identification of the victim yet a full explanation of the crime, judgement, and sentence. This reinforces the general population's respect of management's administration of fair policies and re-states activity that achieves account termination.