Disagree somewhat. If nothing else, the letter writer is bugged by running into these pics. I think it's legit to write back to Mr. Frenemy and say "dude, congrats on the baby and all, but I really could have done without the pictures of you having sex with someone who isn't your wife/my friend, thanks. Does Mrs. Frenemy know about this?"

That succeeds in warning Mr. F. to quit sending you the bulk emails (which I infer you're not that nuts about receiving) and implies a threat that you'll tell Mrs. F.--which might be enough to get him to *at least* stop posting the fucking pictures on the internet, i.e., if he's going to cheat, at least he doesn't have to potentially publicly humiliate his wife.

Plus, dude, these people have a *baby*. That right there is something of an incentive to warn the guy to stop being quite so much of an asshole, while at the same time not stirring the shit.

I do agree with the idea of sending an email to the old friend/wife, though, saying congrats on the baby, how are things going, blah blah.

How else do you celebrate Spousal Independence Day?

I cannot say that putting one's adulterous sex pictures on the internet labelled "Thanksgiving" is a particularly discreet act. Either the wife already knows, or the husband is trying to tell her in his own way. I'd stay out of it.

I agree. Nice job, LB.

Oh god. The last infidelity topic I spent about 20% of my posts reiterating that I didn't think there was a duty to tell. I now gird my loins.

I could go either way on this one. Part of me thinks that maybe it's an open secret if he's so fucking dumb to put it on the Internet, so maybe there's nothing to tell. Or that he deserves someone telling his wife if he's so fucking dumb as to put it on the Internet.

Whatever's to be done, though, SEK doesn't seem to know the guy well enough to make the woodshed option attractive. And confronting him makes it your problem in a way that letting her know doesn't.

I'd probably be inclined to tell her if we'd been very close, if only because if shivbunny were posting pictures of his cheating on the Internet, and I found out my close friends knew but decided not to tell me, and I found out later that they could have spared me the STD or the marriage to a cheating bastard, I'd feel doubly betrayed. But I don't think I'd be as annoyed at an acquaintance.

How many people have gotten these emails containing a link to the photo album from which they can easily get to the MY WILD BANGKOK WEEKEND photo album? Just the letter-writer? Dozens of friends and family?

C'mon, J-Mo, it's not Thanksgiving ("barbecue").

LB's advice is IMHO spot on, though I think Carmello Antony said it best: Stop snitchin.

NOW YOU KNOW HOW OGGERS FEELS

For all we know, she set these encounters up. I'd lean towards either asking not to be on the mailing list anymore (if that's what you actually want), or just pointing out (anonymous email if you don't want to get pulled into anything) that not everyone might want to see this stuff, so sticking it under innocuous headings isn't helping.

I think BPhD has it right in 1.

9: That or just accept this is someone whose photobucket you don't want to go poking around in...

unsubscribe frenemey_update_list

I don't think I can give informed advice without a link to the directory in question.

I was wondering who was going to ask first.

Damn.

First of all, now I'm even sorrier that I missed the recent meatspace Unfoggedtry.

My first impulse was to quickly tell the friend; then I was inclined to agree with LB, until I read B's answer. I was once in a serious (but not baby-serious) relationship with someone who was cheating on me flagrantly and on a long-term basis; many of our common friends knew and nobody told me. And after I found out, I was no longer friends with these people. But I don't know how common my reaction was.

One thing I wonder is, how likely is it that these pictures are up on purpose? Do we think this dumbass just doesn't know how to work iPhoto and thought he really WAS uploading his 4th of Christgiving photos? Not that it makes a big difference; maybe the difference between unfaithful-and-stupid vs. depraved.

Once again, I have to wonder why people ever think it's a good idea to take pictures of themselves having sex.

I can't believe know one has asked the critical question for determining the right course of action: what's the link?

I, uh, want to look at the baby pictures.

Damnit.

Consider the possibly that you are not the only one placed in this spot. If this were a blanket e-mail to several old friends, there may be others on the "copy to" (or perhaps blind copy) list in the same quandry. Implication: Your proactive active options might spread through the grapevine uncomfortably fast with unintended/unforeseen consequences.

I'm surprised that Bitch is the only person who's mentioned the baby in this.

I'm with 9: as the rational thing to do, or with downloading the whole folder, making animations of the pictures, and posting them to YouTube or one of the usenet alt.binary groups

I was wondering who was going to ask first.

Did you really have to wonder?

My advice would be this: tell her. In person (at least on the phone). Maybe they're into that kind of thing and he's just a doofus (in which case, you get to go away embarassed, but no worse for wear). But maybe he's fucking around on her and exposing her to disease.

19: I don't see how the baby neccessarily changes anything

21: You might have been doing something else.

The thing is, I think Cala and cerebrocrat are kind of right that she's going to be mad at SEK (with some reason) if she finds out and finds out he knew and didn't tell her. I'm just not sure that that justifies doing something that might bring a marriage, and one with a baby, to an end. It's a lousy position.

23: It means she's looser.

22: That's what I'd figure except for the `we've drifted apart' bit. Maybe I'm over emphasizing that.

My God, that's incredibly stupid. That goes past casual, and misguided, into "felt wish to get caught" territory. I don't think you have an obligation to blow the gaff, and I think you probably do have an obligation to warn him of the consequences of continued stupidity - just as if you saw him preparing to juggle plutonium.

But what we all want to know is...Labour Day? Veterans' Day?

Or Steak and Blowjob Day already?

What I'm driving at is roughly the Hippocratic oath - first, do no harm. Or alternatively, the procedure air traffic control uses to refuse a clearance to land. They can't order you away, but they can say "this is incredibly dangerous, but we know of no conflicting traffic, and you have been warned that you bear the full responsibility".

If you're her friend you should tell her.

24: It's so lousy that I'm pretty sure both telling and refraining to tell would be ethically justified. But the decision to end the marriage, though, would be hers and her husband's; and this guy is so public, that if this would compel her to end the marriage (and it might not), it's a matter of when, not if. So when is it better? When might it still be fixable? It's pretty sucky with a newborn. It's arguably suckier if she quits her career to have another baby because she thinks everything is fine between them.

I really think the closeness of the relationship would swing it for me. And yeah, you'd have to be prepared to lose the friendship entirely.

Tell.

"I'm just not sure that that justifies doing something that might bring a marriage, and one with a baby, to an end."

Seems like she's the one that should decide what's best for her, not him.

The one rule I can state about marriages, and I'm sure I've this here previously, is that *nobody* knows what is going on in anybody else's marriage except their own. This includes your family and closest friends. For all you know, she could be the one taking the pictures. I wouldn't touch this situation with a ten foot pole.

The baby is the factor that changes my answer from "tell her" to "tell him," and if she ever found out in the end, I'd tell her exactly that by way of explaining myself.

As far as telling the guy, since you're not really HIS ally, and you don't know exactly what's going on, the note I'd write would be as basic as possible, a la, "Hey, what's up with those St. Bastard Day pictures?"

19: I'm pro-natalist, didn't you know?

23: Divorce is harder and shittier when there are kids involved. Duh.

confronting him makes it your problem in a way that letting her know doesn't.

I don't see the logic behind this. 'Splain?

33 Gets my vote

35: Because now you're conniving with him to lie to her. I can still see circumstances under which I might do that, but it's profoundly disloyal to her.

What is the deal with SEK stumbling on sex all the time? Its like, if SEK walks into a McDonald's, people will be having sex. He could time "nytimes.com" in his browser, and the old gray lady would be posting old gray sex photos.

Also, is this a blessing or a curse?

"Hey, what's up with those St. Bastard Day pictures?"

That's pretty good advice, actually. "Did you really intend for the St. Bastard Day photos to be publicly available? Congrats on the baby."

30: What do you think the likelihood is that the pictures are up by mistake? (serious question)

As I think about it, a guy who'd put them up on purpose is a different situation than a guy who's a dumbass.

I agree that "stay out of it" is generally the good advice here, but I think a quick "Dude, there are some photos there that you might not want the whole world to see" would be a kindness.

I favor the "ask the guy what's up with the St. Bastard's day photos" option, because I want to hear more of the story. And even if you don't update the mineshaft (for some unimaginable reason) I would still want to know the rest of the story if I were you.

35: well, yeah, duh. But that changes the situation for them, not for you as the outsider. At least in this case of essentially no information.

37: I disagree. You might as well say that saying *nothing* is conniving to keep a secret. Saying something to the cheater is about telling them to knock it the fuck off without causing pain to the cheatee.

The biggest problem I have with the "tell her" advice is always that it means you're telling her not only that her husband is cheating, but also that you know. So if she decides to stay with him, she has to deal with the knowledge that their friends might see her as a sap or a victim. Which would suck. I think telling him is the best way to balance the responsibility to object to objectionable behavior with the responsibility not to fuck with other people's private relationships.

Pwned, it seems, by 39.

Staying out of it altogether strikes me as the least acceptable option here, if you have any feelings for the friend.

43: I don't think so. We've got a communal interest in kids (or should), and surely part of the writer's angst over the issue has to do with the presence of the baby.

Is there a reason SEK decided not to be anonymous? I don't understand this. The previous AtM was, owing to the circumstances described, not really anonymous; this one isn't really anonymous because it's signed. Perhaps SEK just doesn't care, in which case, why even call it "thinly-veiled"?

33: I'd say you're right (she could be the one taking the pictures), but that still doesn't mean that SEK shouldn't at least inform her that they're easily viewable, because odds are you're wrong (she didn't take the pictures, she's not fine with it, etc.), and the consequences of her not knowing are so much worse than SEK exposing himself to a little awkwardness if it's the other way around.

He should just be prepared to back out of the conversation quickly and embarassedly if it turns out that they're there on purpose and that she's aware of it and fine with it..

Tell her.

FWIW, I wonder how people's opinions on this question accord with their positions on that Ethicist techie-finds-possibly-kiddie-porn-on-boss's-computer issue we all kicked around a while back.

I very much disagree with the spirit of 36. I think we're incredibly uncomfortable with the idea of other people going through hard times, and are tempted to meddle, which is often paternalistic.

I don't actually have an opinion on this specific case though.

I don't think I can give informed advice without a link to the directory in question.

Never mind, found it.

she has to deal with the knowledge that their friends might see her as a sap or a victim

This was the straw that broke the camel's back with my parents; my mom knew dad was a cheating dog, but when everybody else knew too, that was it. This was also part of why I quit speaking to the friends who knew of my situation.

52: Nice.

Uh, 46 not 36 is the one with the disagreeable spirit.

35: It makes you at minimum a co-conspirator. You're now going to monitor his behavior, and decide, if he's been good enough to keep cheating on his wife but not tell you about it, to refrain from telling her. Now you've taken on the responsibility of keeping him in line and having to monitor it, and now mostly what you've done is drive him underground. This probably saves her from some public humiliation, but doesn't let her make the decision herself. And puts you in the position of "I decided for you that his behavior had improved enough that you didn't need to know."

That seems to me to be the most messy option, unless you're very good friends with him and are the sort that could scare him striaght. I could see saying something like 39, but nothing that was like 'clean up your act or I'm telling.'

Marriage trouble now will be far less painful for the kid than a few years down the road. Seems unlikely she'd never find out.

The "for all you know she took the pictures" thing is why I suggested that the author of the letter might want to focus on the "I did not need to see those photos" issue.

Are we certain the pictures were taken after they were married?

"The one rule I can state about marriages, and I'm sure I've this here previously, is that *nobody* knows what is going on in anybody else's marriage except their own. This includes your family and closest friends. For all you know, she could be the one taking the pictures. I wouldn't touch this situation with a ten foot pole."

I agree completely. A great rule of thumb is to mind your own business.

47: I agree that there is (or should be) a communal interest --- I'm not sure we agree with how it is best served.

Anyone want to give odds on the likelihood that she's complicit and wants it to be public?

56: I don't see telling him that you saw the pics and rhetorically asking if his wife knows about this commits you to monitoring his behavior. Agreed, though, that "stop this or I'll tell" is an unenforceable bluff.

57: Emotionally, yes. Depends on what their financial situation is; if the mom's at home and not working, a divorce right now could be economically devastating.

I'm with 9 on this, with a specific vote for the anonymous e-mail to frenemy. Absent the pictures, I might consider other options, but exposing a (potentially) wronged spouse to graphic evidence of this nature - evidence available publicly, no less - would be hideously inflammatory. Nobody would recommend putting such pictures in an envelope addressed to the spouse, and if the only available choices are doing that or tearing the pictures up, I think you'd have to go with tearing the pictures up.

61: Making no claims about how it's best served. Only claiming that the baby makes a difference not only to the parents.

62: highish.

63b) that's the problem with not having any real information; not much sense in project possible scenarios.

Wait. I know the answer. She sent the email out, using his account so she could find out who her real friends are!

62: Way low, given that she's not in any of the pictures (that is, that there's a special directory that's all sex, and all him). It's not impossible, but I'd strongly guess not.

In this day of fuskering, those pictures are on the internet everywhere already.

62: Oh, right, i forgot none of her. scratch my estimate.

62: I think we need separate odds on "complicit" and "wants it to be public."

Yeah. I really think SEK could go either way, since he doesn't seem to be very close with her, but I'm finding the 'maybe she knows and is fine with it' line to be perilously close to rationalizing it away. If she knows and she's fine with it, and you point it out in a spirit of concern, she'll laugh it off.

65: Oh, ok, I think I've found where we diverge --- I think what you say is true only with more specific information than what seems to be there. In the absense of that, I think any assumptions are worse than none; hence the existance of the child factors out.

If you're her friend you should tell her.

Exactly.

If she knows, then they're both assholes. You don't stick pictures of your sex life into publicly viewable folders and then send emails with links to the account to your friends who you have no reason to believe want to know about your sex life.

To expand on my guess (which is pulled out of my ass) I would expect most people in open marriages posting sex pictures online would want to make it clear that no one was getting cheated on and no one should be feeling bad for the other partner --everyone was happy and pleased about the whole thing. For her to be complicit and the photos to be posted the way they are, they almost have to be getting off on the making people think it's cheating, which while not impossible, seems like it would be rarer than just an open marriage.

72: Agreed in that `maybe she know's' isn't an excuse not to bring it up --- it's a caveat not to make assumptions.

It's really hard for me to believe that sex pictures on a Photobucket account - the same Photobucket account that the baby pictures are on - are something the friend consented to. If not-SEK was sent to the page by way of an update-on-life e-mail, than that Photobucket page could very well be where the grandparents, etc, are going to see the baby. If the husband did put them there on purpose, then, again, odds are he's either an idiot or pathologically unconcerned for his wife.

I agree that "take them down or I'll tell" is not the way to go here, and is also totally unnecessary. Merely indicating that you know is all the check you can/need to put on the husband's behavior.

75: sure, but that's plausibly a mistake in exactly the same ways that he might not have meant them to be public (and she doesn't know), or might not have meant to distribute so broadly, or whatever.

either an idiot or pathologically unconcerned for his wife

This seems to be almost certainly the case.

79: Which again is why you say "dude, I didn't want to see those pictures."

81: which is what I said ages ago. commity!

Again, and I'll say again, SEK seems to be distant enough that nearly any option would be defensible, I'm imagining having to defend this decision to my friend when she finds out that I knew, thought it was serious enough to ask her husband to take them down, but didn't think it was serious enough to let her know. And I'm imagining: "So, you thought it was okay that he was cheating on me as long as he was quiet about it?"

To which you say, "no, but I didn't think it was my business to say anything other than that I didn't want to see those pics."

83:Yeah. I couldn't do that unless I could really say something like: "Even though he was cheating on you, I knew the marriage was important enough to you, and I thought it was strong enough, that it was worth keeping together, and I thought covering this up so the two of you could move on and maybe fix things was the way to go -- I didn't know what else to do." I'd still expect the friend to be furious, but I'd have to at least be able to say something like that.

84,85: And that's a response that only works if you're not particularly close, I think. I have wildly differing intuitions on this if I haven't spoken to the person in years except for periodic life-update mass mailings, than if it's someone I see for coffee once a week (where I presumably am in a position to see her making plans based on the false assumption that her marriage is going to be fine.)

I could tell exactly where this was going when the word "photobucket" appeared. I wasn't aware people used it for non-smut purposes.

I think he should tell her. (In a way he's the ideal person to do so precisely because he's not in touch with her that much any more. It would actually be harder for people who are currently closer to do so.) I know the timing is bad wrt baby but I think she's entitled to know. Especially because it's pictures of sex with MULTIPLE other women. If it was a single incident SEK stumbled across knowledge of then the argument "don't trigger the end of the marriage over this" might have more weight. But he is presumably going to keep doing this, it's a pattern. Also I don't think email is the right way to do this, a phonecall would be better because of the interactivity. Harder for SEK, of course.

I'm finding myself persuaded by 83. Although, I *still* think I'd start off with a "wtf" message to the husband. And then perhaps be on the lookout for the right occasion to have a talk with the friend. And going along with 86, I think it would matter how close we were, although I can't at the moment decide what different steps I would take on that basis.

87: For reals? All I EVER get on Photobucket is baby pictures.

Agree with those who say that various responses could all be ethical. Part of this is related to the closeness of the friendship -- if I were dear friends with someone, it would change the calculation (not least because I would probably already know whether they are the kind of person who would be angrier about being told, or not being told).

It makes me think of Elinor Lipman's The Way Men Act, in which the heroine loses her flower-shop job because the co-owner husband is cheating on his co-owner wife. Later, there is an explanation for why the more-or-less innocent bystander got fired:

"They probably want their privacy to yell at each other or punish each other or do whatever they need to do to stick it out. Where else are they going to let it out? Not at home in front of the girls. So they don't want to have to walk on eggshells in the shop, and they don't want to see the looks on each other's faces when you come back from having coffee with [the other woman]."

I think I would tell simply because I wouldn't want anyone whom I had even once loved to be married to the sort of creep this guy appears to be. If he is mass-mailing a list of friends/acquaintances with a pointer to a photobucket account that will lead even the idly curious to pics of him having sex, he is a turd. LIke someone said, think of the grandparents.

Thanks for the advice, all. I'm leaning towards B's option -- send him an email making him aware they're public. He's never liked me, never will -- I'm an egghead, you see -- so there's no worries on that front. Thing is, he's the sort of dumb ass who would cheat, then show his buddies what he's been tapping on the sly. That's got to be the reason he's uploaded the pictures.

rob, I'm not sure why I'm always (literally or figuratively) stumbling into other people's sex lives, nor whether it's a blessing or a curse.

ben, as for why I'm only pseudo-anonymous, it's so at some future point, I can show her that I wrestled with this issue. I mean, the odds of her 1) knowing I comment as SEK and 2) reading Unfogged are slim-to-none. If I don't send her this link, she'll never see it; if I do, she'll see that one of her friends did still care about her, that she isn't all alone, &c.

As for the marriage: they have two small children, the younger about six years old. She gave up med school for the marriage, but I think she did night school to become an R.N. after the first kid was born. (I vaguely remember him complaining about that a few years back.)

Also, someone asked how old the pictures were: some are over two years old, the most recent from this January. (At least, that's what the meta-data on the pictures says.) And there's absolutely, positively no chance that she's alright with this.

One more point. I don' t know photobucket. But on flickr it might very well be possible to tell when the photos had been taken. That might alter the situation. If they were all pre-marriage, then he is a different sort of turd, lesser, more bouyant.

But he's not,. as SEK makes clear.

ben, as for why I'm only pseudo-anonymous, it's so at some future point, I can show her that I wrestled with this issue. I mean, the odds of her 1) knowing I comment as SEK and 2) reading Unfogged are slim-to-none. If I don't send her this link, she'll never see it; if I do, she'll see that one of her friends did still care about her, that she isn't all alone, &c.

I wouldn't ever send her the link. A bunch of strangers hashing over your marriage, even not knowing who you are? If you want proof you were there for her, get in touch for real.

In light of the new info in 92, I'll stick with the just-send-him-the-email advice. You say he'll never like you, but at least now he'll fear you.

I think she did night school to become an R.N. after the first kid was born. (I vaguely remember him complaining about that a few years back.)

Wow, this guy is an asshole. I'm leaning toward much stronger measures now. At the very least, take B's option.

"six years" s/b "six months"

The holiday in question's the 4th of July, and there's a big annual BBQ that a mutual friend's hosted for years and years. I can't be the only person who clicked through and foiled his hide-them-in-plain-sight tactic.

big annual BBQ that a mutual friend's hosted for years and years. I can't be the only person who clicked through and foiled his hide-them-in-plain-sight tactic.

Aw, geez. I'm leaning toward 'tell her' now -- it's going to blow up in weeks, if not sooner, and hearing about it from someone who wants to be supportive might help. I bet she gets mad at you for telling her, though (not a reason not to, just something to expect).

Really, I still don't know.

You say he'll never like you, but at least now he'll fear you.

Or try to beat the ever-living shit out of me the next time I'm in town. (Yes, he would try; yes, he certainly could; yes, he would know, since he works with one of my closest friends; no, I don't want to have to sneak around town every time I go home.)

Ha! I was sort of agreeing with B till SEK's 92. Now I'm thinking, send her the fucking URL. She needs out of there asap, whatever it takes.

I vaguely remember him complaining about that a few years back... Rip his nuts off with a plastic picnic fork!

Christ, what an asshole.

Sheesh, what a shit situation.

Since he sent it to a lot of different people, you could always anonymize yourself for the purposes of sending the "take the goddamn pictures down already" email.

True. And if you tell her, I would also send him a "I didn't want to see that" email -- she shouldn't be the only one who tells him to stop humiliating her.

I'm swung from "do whatever, this sucks" to "she needs to know." Blah, blah, incomplete information, but she needs to know before she makes more decisions that compromise her own goals and ambitions. Maybe they save the marriage, maybe they don't, but I think she needs to know.

"I'm leaning towards B's option -- send him an email making him aware they're public."

That seems extremely ill-advised. You're not helping her, yet you risk getting into trouble w him when she inevitably finds out.

Tell her, If you're seriously afraid, maybe send her the pic anomously, because then she really needs to find.

The baby's relevant not just because divorce with kids involved is bad, but because having a new baby in the house puts a lot of stress on a marriage. This would be a pretty vulnerable time for her to hear her husband's been cheating, if in fact that's what's going on here.

One thing that might ease the dilemma a little is that if the update list has a lot of people on it, chances are very good that you're not the only one to stumble across those pictures, and that someone else who saw them might be in a better position to talk to her about what's going on there.

I'd go with B's #1 and send the husband an e-mail telling him you really didn't need to see that. If you want to get in touch with the friend and see how she's doing, you should do that, but I'd approach the whole photos issue very cautiously if at all.

Once again, I agree with Weman and honestly, it doesn't seem like a very hard call. She's your friend, or at least was, and she's making big compromises for a husband who's cheating on her. How can you not tell her?

Please tell her. I just can't get behind sending HIM the email. It's like a "wink-wink-nudge-nudge, I know we all cheat but you don't want your stupid WIFE to find out, do ya?" Even if written in the most scathing manner possible, it makes you the Holder of His Secret, with which you MAY betray him, but until you do, you are ACTIVELY betraying his wife.

I could also understand the say nothing route, as it is not actually your business. And I understand how uncomfortable it would be. But if you're going to spill any beans, it makes no sense to me to tell a thief how to better conceal his ill-gotten gains. Better to tell the one who's been robbed that you know where the loot is hidden in plain sight.

lost half a sentence. Tell her, if no one else will have in a while. But ideally probably you should, and soon, to avoid unnecessary pain.

Or try to beat the ever-living shit out of me the next time I'm in town. (Yes, he would try; yes, he certainly could...

This doesn't sound good at all.

Gah, I didn't see the bit about the husband being willing to kick ass if you came to town.

In that case, I'd keep my mouth shut for the time being and just try to be there for my friend.

92: This guy is a world class asshole. Now I'm thinking, don't send her the url, but tell her about having gotten his MASS email and clicked around to see what their family's up to, and having found pics of him having sex with other women, plural. If nothing else, the disease risk is something she should take into account. Emphasize that you won't judge her no matter what she decides to do about it, that you know it must be really embarrassing for her to hear it from you, that you entirely sympathize, but that you just thought she should know that he's apparently not only cheating, but being very careless about who finds out.

Shit, while you're at it, hire someone to beat the crap out of him.

Jesus. She gave up med school for this dick.

104 - I've seriously considered that, but she'd want to know who sent the anonymous email, and I don't think I'd be able to lie to her face if she asked me.

106 - she's already compromised enough, in my opinion, but is young enough that she could still have a career. (Her entire extended family now lives in Baton Rouge, post-Katrina, so childcare would not be a problem.)

107 - I'm less afraid of a beating -- I've taken plenty in my time, and anyway, I have friends there too -- than of the return-to-high-school the drama around it would entail.

I'm starting to lean toward the "tell her" camp. You don't want to be the secret-holder, particularly not for an utter asshole like that. You might not be the only one who knows, maybe not even the only one who tells her, but you can be a friend to her in what might shortly become a really difficult time.

Fuck the drama. Do the right thing and let her know. If people try to gossip to you, just say that it isn't any of your or their business.

I'm am now with B's updated suggestion. You need to tell her, because she is in a bad place in many ways, and needs help.

I have to say, I was surprised to see BPhD taking the position of "don't say anything to the wife" because that might lead to a divorce, which would be shittier with a kid involved. Elsewhere, Bitch, you've been pretty consistent about trusting women and I don't follow why this would be different. Maybe it's better for the wife to stay married. Maybe it's better for her to get a divorce. Seems to me there's no reason to think she is unqualified to make those decisions for herself. If I were in that position, I'd want to know so I could make my own decision.

Sure, telling her means she has to deal with, to some extent, worrying about how her friends will view her (sap or victim), but a friend can pretty easily say, hey, whatever you decide, I support you. It's not my business to tell you how to live your life, but I thought you would want to know. If you say nothing and she later finds out you knew, she has to deal with the feeling that her friend either (a) didn't care enough about her to let her know, (b) didn't trust her ability to handle the truth, or (c) didn't trust her ability to make a good decision for herself and her child based on the facts.

If it were me, I'd want to know.

119: It's not about trusting or not trusting the woman; it's about not embarrassing someone you don't know very well, and not sticking your nose into other people's private arrangements.

I didn't much appreciate my sister in law telling my husband to divorce me and take PK after she found my blog, for instance. And my anger at her over that did not exactly help our marriage for a while there.

B, the "drama" isn't gossip, it's of the what-lunch-table-can-I-sit-at-without-him-seeing-me sort. Only, now it'll be what-bars-can-I-go-to-where-none-of-his-friends-will-be, since they'd either start something with me themselves or call him up and get a posse together. He's a good ol' boy, but he's a meathead even by those low standards.

I'm definitely leaning towards telling her, now. Just have to suck it up and make the phone call. Man, the knowledge that what I'm about to say is going to shatter someone's life. Not fun, not fun.

Um, okay. I type/read too slow. I see BPhD has clarified her position. Consider #119 withdrawn...

Anyone else thinking of Harry Potter and the secret-keepers? No? Just me?

Glad you're all seeing reason now. He's not the one that deserves the courtesy of a note here.

Damn. After 92 and the rest, I'm even more in the "tell her" camp.

Hmm. I wonder what the Ethicist would say?

And I got the machine.

Gah.

I never understood the idea that a third party would know better as to whether cheating should break up a marriage than the cheated-upon him/herself. I mean, if it's a really great marriage, and it should survive the husband putting pictures of himself having sex with another woman on the internet, can't the wife come to that conclusion herself? Isn't she, in fact, the person with the best information to make that decision, as opposed to our otherwise quite knowledgable SEK?

120: You didn't appreciate it, but that seems to be mostly because she tried to substitute her judgment for his: divorce her, take the kid, leave. Was he upset with her? Would he have been if she had said, "I love you, and I don't know if you know about your wife's blog and boyfriend, and I thought you needed to know, and I'll support you whatever you decide"?

121: Ah, that shit. Sorry, not something I think of b/c I'm not in touch with the old h.s. crowd at all. Sucky.

Oh well, I'm sure your reputation among that group for general pussiness is pretty well established already, no?

126 - I have absolutely no intention to tell her what to do with this information. I'm going to share what I know, then be shoulder.

I see many have come to this conclusion. Generally, I think the dread of being-in-the-dark-about-things is worse than actual knowledge of such things. Maybe true ignorance is bliss, but rarely is there true ignorance.

This is a mostly irrelevant tangent, but do the women in the pictures seem to be aware they are being photographed? Because I'm trying to imagine what kind of idiot would allow their sleeping with somebody else's husband to be digitized for posterity.

Exactly--I was arguing in favor of your giving her the info. Sorry to be confusing.

I imagine he uploaded the wrong pictures from his camera by mistake.

131: And did they also go to the same high school? Because this could be an endless cascade of awfulness.

131: Or maybe the women don't know he's married and think it's just good times.

Oh well, I'm sure your reputation among that group for general pussiness is pretty well established already, no?

Yes, it is.

127: I don't know if he would have been or not, but that's not the point. The point is that marriage is important, and I don't think that sticking one's nose into other people's marriages is a good idea simply because you disapprove of what you think is going on.

Making up your mind about whether or not you're going to tell someone about something that you know is going to upset them depends on a lot of variables. We've all known people who use "I just thought you should know" as an excuse to stir the shit. And I don't agree that staying within the boundaries of what you have a right to bitch about--I didn't want to see those pictures, jerk--is the same as agreeing to keep secrets.

And obviously, given the extra information in 92, I think that SEK should tell the woman. But I think that making it a blanket rule that you should meddle whenever you think someone's cheating is wrong.

121: Sorry, SEK, that situation sucks. With your further info though, I'm sure your decision to call her is right. Good luck with that.

And I've got to remind you, SEK, that you're not "shattering somebody's life." Mr. Meathead did that himself, with the help of a few female meathead friends. You're only letting her know that, while her back was turned, said shattering was accomplished (and photographed, and posted on the internet). You are showing her a broken window, not throwing rocks. Big difference, even if she doesn't see it that way at first (or even ever).

Related advice: If you sell your old digital camera for 5 dollars at a garage sale, be sure to delete all of your sex pictures first.

(It was very strange to buy a camera at a garage sale from a nice young mother of two small children and have my quiet inner question "I wonder what she looks like naked" answered as soon as I got the camera to work.)

136: So I should never, ever move to St. Louis, I guess? Jeebus.

127: Bitchphd, I think you have to really careful along those lines too --- after all, how much domestic violence was historically (and less so, still) societally accepted because what when on inside a marriage wasn't anybody elses business?

Sticking your nose into other peoples marriages seems like something you have take an active role in; SEK had this dropped on him out of the blue. I don't think there are very easy deliniations for a lot of this.

134: I knew one of the women in the pictures, and I know she knows he's married -- she was in the wedding party, if I'm remembering right. The others, well, I didn't look through them all, as there are some 500+ in that folder. (And Photobucket does some strange thing to Firefox -- eats all my memory, then my computer freezes.) But I imagine the other ones belong to that rather wide circle of friends in Baton Rouge. Not a clique, really, but everyone knows everyone.

(It was very strange to buy a camera at a garage sale from a nice young mother of two small children and have my quiet inner question "I wonder what she looks like naked" answered as soon as I got the camera to work.)

Laughing really hard at this.

No, I think SEK is shattering her life. But I think it is the right thing for him to do in this case. There's a certain smugness in the "hey, I'm just telling you about something that's already happened" argument that doesn't wash, just like it doesn't wash that it's good to tell someone their partner is cheating because they should know/you respect them/you think they should decide what to do about it themselves.

The fact is that if you tell someone something unpleasant, you are actively doing something that will upset them. In some cases that's okay. But that doesn't mean it's neutral, or not something that should be taken into account.

137: And hence why I've been very careful to say that there isn't a blanket rule. I may have left that out of one or two comments on this thread.

Neither is there a blanket rule "never meddle" or "what she don't know won't hurt her", and I'm uncomfortable with arguments that say, well, if she finds out, they'll probably get divorced, so keep your mouth shut or tell him to hide the evidence better. Whether they get divorced or not really should be their call.

129: Yeah, based on the further info in 92, she needs to know. Not fun.

145: What do you mean by doesn't wash, there? Who said anything about smugness or whatever? Sometimes the right thing to do is painful; only less so than alternatives.

142: Well, duh. Nonetheless, even nowadays if you know a couple where one partner is violent with the other, the potential shame of the abused partner is something you ought to take into account when deciding whether and how you're going to talk to her about it.

SEK: you've revealed some facts as this has gone along that have changed the whole color and meaning of the "hypothetical" to us. I'm not saying you should have revealed them upfront, but am wondering what kind of answer you were looking for initially. Perhaps a concensus on this sort of situation in the abstract, before the various personal connections, and degrees of knowledge of the parties, were revealed?

The relevant part in my link RE: my pussiness:

Scott has been beaten on a regular basis for three years now. Everyone knows that Scott doesn't hit back anymore. People who fight Scott are no longer rewarded for doing so because who couldn't beat up the guy who never hits back? Yet they do it anyway.

Clarified because I'm still getting the damn machine.

140: And don't forget that pictures can often be recovered easily even if deleted or the card re-formatted. There are plenty of "rescue" programs out there for free or little cost and they do work.

arguments that say, well, if she finds out, they'll probably get divorced, so keep your mouth shut or tell him to hide the evidence better.

I did not, and would not say such a thing. I am saying that being cheated on would suck; finding out that you're cheated on would suck; *and* finding out that other people know about it might very well suck. And that because of that last, it's not immoral or condoning cheating to tell the cheater that you object to his behavior without going and telling the wife that you know about it.

149: Ok, `well duh' then. But now I have no idea what you are on about, because I didn't see anybody as suggesting you should do such a think lightly. Just that you should do it (based on your inference from what you know of the people, etc. etc. etc.).

Perhaps a concensus on this sort of situation in the abstract...

Pretty much. I'd already changed my mind as to what I was going to do about 5,000 times since I found the pictures, and I thought it'd help to see some of my decision-trees spelled out by others, so as to get a better grasp of what the implications of each were.

154: It seems to me that a lot of people are saying that not telling is wrong because the wife "should know." Or that telling the husband but not the wife amounts to condoning or keeping his secret (whereas not telling doesn't?). I don't see a lot of people explicitly acknowledging that the telling *in and of itself* might justifiably upset the wife.

And that because of that last, it's not immoral or condoning cheating to tell the cheater that you object to his behavior without going and telling the wife that you know about it.

It is substituting your judgment for hers. I can see keeping your mouth shut, because you're not in a position to judge what's going on, or you're worried it will hurt her. I can see telling. But I can't see being in a position to judge, knowing it will hurt her, and deciding that the thing to do is to protect her by letting him know he needs to hide the evidence better.

I'm not advocating a blanket rule either. Mostly I'm a mind-you-own kinda gal, so my opinion on this deviates from my normal s.o.p. Case-by-case basis, et cetera, providing you encounter lots of ilicit sex scenes, as SEK seems to. Also not advocating that he tell her to divorce the meathead, move to Oregon, join a cult, and grow wildflowers, for the record. I'm just saying I think he should tell her.

I'm also not advocating that he phrase his unveiling in the "smug" "it was already broke and I'm just the messenger" way. That was phrased for SEK's benefit, because I, personally, don't think he should feel guilty for saying something. Partly because I know (or assume, from what I've read here) that he isn't just stirring the pot for the sake of DRAMA, but because he genuinely seems concerned and reluctant to pot-stir. Partly because I have one of those justice-system mentalities that blames the murder on the person who actually killed someone else, not on the witness who reported it or the boat captain who refused to give the victim a ride or the lover who didn't let the victim sleep over (or whatever the options were on that stupid test we took in junior high).

156: True, telling the wife might in and of itself justfiiably upset her. Buy so might not telling her. Or telling him, and not her. Thing is, there is no way out of this. It isn't a situation you ask to find yourself it, but once there, it is unavoidalble. So the fact that telling here might upset her is in no way a justification for not doing anything. From the information I've seen, it seem the least harmful alternative, and I think all such situations would be highly particular to the people involved.

In the absence of any information though, I think the expected harm of tellling her/him is outweighed by the expected harm of not telling them.

"I don't see a lot of people explicitly acknowledging that the telling *in and of itself* might justifiably upset the wife." It could understandably upset a wife, one really couldn't blame her, but never justfibly, unless she knew your motives weren't honorable.

That ... did not go well. I am so getting my ass kicked the next time I go home.

149: "the potential shame of the abused partner is something you ought to take into account when deciding whether and how you're going to talk to her about it."

I agree to the extent of the "how," I have a hard time extending that to the "whether." The shame of the abused partner is undoubtedly one of the most wrenching things about abuse. It's one of the things that allows abuse to continue -- because the abused feels too ashamed to do anything about it.

I'm not saying there's any easy answer to the "how" part. But for someone who has been a victim of abuse, having someone who will speak up and say, "Hey, that's abuse and it's not right and you don't deserve it," is overwhelming and important. I think of that scene in Good Will Hunting where Robin Williams tells Matt Damon over and over and over, "It wasn't your fault." Overwhelming, but necessary. There is alot of shame, but having someone who will acknowledge how natural that feeling of shame is -- and, more importantly, will let the abused know that s/he has nothing to be ashamed of -- can break the cycle.

Sometimes the victim feels that shame because they think they deserve what's being done to them or believe that it's not something they have a right to complain about. Silence by those who know what's going on tacitly (even if unwittingly) reinforces that.

But the how will always be a very delicate thing.

That's if I decide to go home again anytime soon, which, probably not.

What, did she not believe you?

Oh, crap. But you knew it wasn't likely to go well -- still might have been the right thing to do.

That ... did not go well.

Uh oh.

Oh, SEK; you talked to her? When you say `did not go well', do you mean in the expected way, or even worse?

Yeah, you've got a lot of sympathy here. What happened?

Since SEK seems to have made his decision, I'm going to piggyback an "ask the Mineshaft" on top of his thread, stemming from what B says about handling abused partners 149.

Supposing you (and by "you" I mean "me") know a woman who is / has been in an abusive relationship, and is having trouble breaking it off (co-dependency issues). The abusive partner keeps perpetually drifting back into her life, and the woman has sworn you not to confront him about his abuse issues for fear of how he might flip out. You can't persuade her to go to the police about him (same fears apply), nor to talk to people at women's shelter and support organizations (same fears apply). You've had restrained, nonconfrontational talks with him about how maybe they're not good for each other, which seem not to have accomplished much (and may, for all you know, have made things worse). You've been friends with the woman for years and completely cutting her off is definitely not a preferred option, but seeing her will often mean seeing him, and this is... becoming untenable.

Is there some really obvious option here for securing help for the friend in question that I've been missing? Or do I actually have to sever myself from this situation and sort of blindly hope this couple doesn't become another domestic violence statistic? (Moreso than they already are, I mean.)

I'll have to join the chorus of post-92 "tell hers."

Oh shit. Posted that before I saw SEK's update. What does "did not go well" mean?

I'm shaking a little here. Damn it. So, an eventful ten minutes or so.

Yes, so I called her, she's so happy to hear from me, and I say "we need to talk." She immediately jumps to "YOUR CANCER'S BACK!" I say, "no, that's not it," to which she responds "well then, it can't be that bad." I say, "it kind of is." Then I mention wanting to see who'd grown fat and ugly, looking at the pictures from the 4th, and she's confused.

So she says hold on a second, she's already online, let her just take a look at them. I'm telling her to wait, she's saying, "no, really, it's no trouble, we got digital cable..."

Then she screams. I mean, screams. Phone goes dead. I try calling back, and it's busy. Then my phone rings, and it's her husband, screaming "what the fuck did you do, [Prof. SEK's], what the fuck did you do." I hung up. He called back, started in with the death threats. I hung up. He called back, I hung up.

Now the phone's off the hook, but I'm worried that she may try to call back. Fuck fuck fuck.

It is substituting your judgment for hers.

No, it isn't. It's making a judgment about the thing that is *your* business--that is to say, the fact that you know.

159: There's a difference between an action which upsets someone, and a lack of action.

160: So the fact that her anger at you isn't "justified" in your mind makes it okay? Jeez. The issue here isn't whether or not you're morally pure. The issue is the wife, and her feelings.

LB: redact his name right now!

Is there some really obvious option here for securing help for the friend in question that I've been missing?

Unfortunately, no.

B's right. I am responsible for shattering her world. I have never heard a scream like that before.

Holy shit.

redact his name right now!

I don't think anonymity is an issue at this point.

OMG, Scott. I can only guess what you're feeling right now. Chin up--it's gonna be for the best in the long run.

172: Don't worry, Scott. The husband is an asshole, he is acting like assholes do. And if anything, his being angry at you lets him focus his assholishness on you at the moment, rather than her. Does she have your cell phone #?

This is not the time for me to jump in to say that I disagree with B, is it?

Do you have a mutual friend in her town who could be trusted to help her out? It's making me really nervous to think of her at home alone with an angry husband.

SEK: Can you get someone local to check on her? One of her relatives, maybe? Or a friend?

Oh, god, poor her and poor you. Should you email and apologize for breaking it hard, and just offer to be supportive?

I would have voted for telling her as well but . . . that sounds terrible.

I hope you and she get through this okay.

I don't think she has my cell. Damn it, should've anticipated this. Funny how you can about practically nothing else for fucking ever and still miss the obvious. So...I'm just going to continue typing on the internet for a while, because I don't know what the fuck else to do.

173: Sure, there is a difference. But it's second order ... you only weight that difference if you honestly expect the results to be nearly equal. Which I didn't.

Anyway, this is all out of the realm of speculation now, so I don't feel like pursuing that....

182: He's not at home. He works about 45 minutes away. But yes, calling other people and telling them what happened, good idea. On it.

And the local friend, if there is one, too. I wouldn't tell the whole story, just say that you'd upset her and thought she really really needed support, and let her tell the friend whatever she wanted.

Wait, wait, SEK, don't just call anyone! Stop for a second and choose someone you and she really really trust.

And really, don't go telling the whole story. Find someone reliable and close to her, and tell them she needs help, but not the whole deal.

188:

Oh, I'm so sorry it went like that. That was abrupt to say the least.

If he's 45 min away, how did he call you back so quick, and can't you call her on a different line?

Anyway, please do phone others. And try and contact her.

176: You did, but someone was going to. And you're entirely sympathetic to her, which is good. And in this case, it was the right thing to do. Try not to feel guilty.

Put the phone back on the hook, but let the answering machine screen the calls for you. If he's screaming death threats, you want those recorded anyhow.

God, Scott. Poor her and poor you. She has family in the area, right?

194.--Absolutely.

God, Scott, poor her and poor you. Her family is in the area, aren't they? Is there a brother or sister you could call to check in on her?

Ack.

I'm really feeling the urge to try and do something helpful, but of course, there isn't anything. Consider this an e-guyhug.

194 is excellent advice. Also, just send her an email with your cell phone #.

Jesus Christ. Is there anyone closer to her that you know of that you can talk to?

Also, does he know where you live?

Scott, that sounds awful. I'm so sorry it happened like that.

LBJ, I think Apo is right in 175. And it's lousy, but there's an inherent conflict in staying close enough to her that she is reminded that she has resources to depend on (since it's such a hallmark that abusers isolate their victims) while also protecting yourself from getting sucked into his orbit.

Called her mom. She was already on her way over there. My friend must've called him at work. Said the husband's on his way home, too, and they're trying to get packed and out of there before he gets there.

Called her mom.

Exactly exactly right.

Called her mom.

Good choice.

SEK -- God, that's hard. I'm so sorry, for you and for her. You did a really hard thing. She's lucky to have a friend who (right or wrong) cares enough about her to be willing to do a really hard thing.

LBJ -- Please, please don't cut her off. Abuse thrives on isolating the victim. It sucks. It may take a really long time for her to build up the strength to extricate herself. But she'll really needs to know you are there to support her, no matter what. It's bad enough to be abused. It's even worse to be abused *and* feel abandoned at the same time.

That's the thing about old friends, I think. Even though we're not close anymore, I still know the number at her mom's house by heart.

200 - He does, but he's 3000 miles away. Still, I'm pretty sure I'm not going home this Christmas.

Ugh, good.

At this point, Scott, you just let her know--via email or a call to her mom's later--that you're there for her if she wants to talk. And then you don't bring it up unless she does. Instead you ask about the kids--what they're like, how old they are, idle chit-chat.

(Also, I'm glad her mom has her cell phone number on the answering machine message.)

202: You've done what you can. In my book, you're a mensch. And yeah, hold onto any recorded death threats. 'Round these parts, saying things like that is a crime.

they're trying to get packed and out of there before he gets there.

Oh my god.

SEK, they don't make movies about it, but you did something both brave and noble. Good call on calling the mom.

175, 201: Yeah, that's kind of what I thought.

And many sympathies to SEK. Drama was to be expected, but to have it be that immediate and intense is pretty fucking rough. For what it's worth coming from a double-anonymous 'Netcreature, though, I think you did right.

202, 203. Yes. Also, if this guy is prone to being physical, like you suggested & perhaps has a temper, it obviously isn't the optimial way for this to all happen. Since it did, though, a call to their local constabulary isn't out of order, SEK, anon or otherwise. They are only too happy to mediate situations like this (since the alternatives sometimes go so badly). She and/or her mom might not think of this, or underestimate it.

You might try to get her to calll the PD too. They'll often (depending on the local policies, I guess) do escort service out of potentially dangerous situations.

LBJ: No concrete ideas, except to concur that you shouldn't disappear on her.

SEK, I'm sorry this happened.

I hope her children are at school/ daycare/ whatever. This is a terrifying thing to be in the middle of. I'm so sorry it went that way, but it really isn't your fault, SEK. Meathead seems unhinged in all kinds of ways, and it is better for her to know now, I think, rather than later. Or at least, let us hope so, since there's no going back.

205.2: I hear you, and have stuck with it a long time for that reason. I guess I'm coming to the point now where if I have to make small talk with the guy in question while staring at a hole in their wall one more time, I'm going to not be able to keep my cool anymore, which isn't helpful either.

The husband's response makes me apoplectic. "What the fuck did you do, [Prof. SEK's]." No, what the fuck did you do, pal?

Di's comment: LBJ -- It may take a really long time for her to build up the strength to extricate herself. reminds me: the people I know who've worked with DV survivors over the long term say that most report:

1) Dozens of times of picking up the phone before calling the hotline.

2) Numerous times of hanging up on the hotline before saying anything.

3) Multiple times of calling the hotline and talking to a counselor before deciding to leave.

4) An average of seven times of leaving the abuser before leaving for good.

It's a process. It's excruciating to watch from the outside, and it sometimes seems Sisyphean, but it is a process, and sometimes it helps to know that.

Oh, Jesus, Scott. That sucks. So sorry. You deserve a lot of credit for your courage.

Clearly when she called husband, she mentioned SEK's name, not "Never mind how I found out."

This is surreal. I'm sitting here listening to death threats on my answering machine, staring at the computer screen, twiddling my thumbs.

I'm so glad I decided to do this when Meg's not home. Telling her about the death threats is better than her actually hearing them.

Also, I don't think they'll hesitate to call the cops if need be, since a few of her relatives are cops. And I just realized, he works about 45 minutes away in a pre-Katrina BR. What with the LA-type traffic there now, there's no way he beats her mom there.

Might it be wise to call the local PD, or for the mom to? If he's prone to violence, it might be useful to have an escort.

LBJ, I think you just need to stand by your friend until she reaches out to you. It sucks, but there it is.

(advice/lurking -->) I'd def. consult w/ the mom one more time before jumping a few levels into calling the PD.

However, if mom sounds as equally frightened as her daughter of the potential of an... encounter... with this guy, it might be worth gently reccomending.

this sucks. you have my utmost sympathy.

I rather hope that the mother and wife think to go pick up the kids before he comes back and finds the wife gone.

And I just realized that he must be calling me on the road. Why the fuck is he calling me instead of trying to get in touch with her?

222: IDP, my guess is that she was so distraught she has no idea what she said -- it would have been natural enough to start off with some disjointed variation on a normal story: "S/K called me and I saw the pictures and HOW DARE YOU !&$T^!$^!$!"

228: Because he's angry, and he's focused on you. This is a good thing, you know.

With any luck he'll have an accident. Heck, why don't you pick up the phone and let him yell at you, see if you can make him drive off the road?

B, kids are at home, as they're 1 1/2 and six months old.

Damn it, I want to call back but don't want to be a damn nuisance.

Seriously. Tell him how small his dick looks in all the pictures.

Oh, man...well, if it hadn't happened when SEK called her, it would have happened eventually. LOTS of people were sent this email that allowed them into the Photobucket, and this meathead had no idea he'd sent it to them.

Not blaming her, just doing the Columbo thing, Witt.

Right. Mad at you, 3000 miles away, is good -- there's no particularly good reason yet to think that he's going home to be violent at her, rather than something like begging her not to leave him.

I agree with the g; I think calling the police is a very good idea, and recommending a call to the police is also a good idea, and a call to the police might even be warranted if you can't get a hold of the mother again, but it's good to ask.

SEK might want to save a local copy of the offending evidence. If this does end up in a divorce, that sort of thing might be useful.

From what I can tell from what he's saying, she said she just talked to me and now she's leaving him. I don't think he has a clue what's going on, or maybe thinks she and I are having an affair.

231: Don't call back right now, she's got enough shit to worry about without having to make you feel better. Call her later tonight at her mom's, or else sometime tomorrow, just to tell her you're sorry and make sure she's physically okay.

I want to call back

She's packing as quickly as she can and probably ignoring the phone right now anyhow (which is likely why he's calling you instead of her). Wait 'til tonight, and do it by email with a "call me any time".

Nope, I'm wrong. He's pissed because I was snooping around his Photobucket, I wasn't supposed to see those, they weren't meant for me. I'm going to download the whole damn folder now, as there's no fucking way he doesn't delete them.

Dear god, this man is stupid.

Anybody got technical advice?

Does he sound angry enough to be violent?

And it's official: I'm not the only one who found the pictures. Another friend told him he found them and was told to mind his own fucking business like I should've. (Also, he knows I'm listening, and if I don't pick up the phone blah blah blah.)

He's pissed because I was snooping around his Photobucket

He doesn't really understand the internet very well, does he?

244 - yes, but only at me. I don't think he's ever been violent with her.

220, 225 are of course correct. So I guess my real question is about ulcer treatment.

Yes, Mr. Frienemy is not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

He probably believes she's sleeping with you, maybe not getting that this is just about the pictures. Be careful.

he knows I'm listening, and if I don't pick up the phone

...then, then, then, I'll, uh, I'll, uhhhh... I WILL FILL UP YOUR GODDAMNED ANSWERING MACHINE SO NOBODY ELSE CAN LEAVE A MESSAGE, SMARTGUY.

This guy's just making it easy for his divorce lawyer and your restraining order at this point. God, what a fuck up.

245 is officially hilarious. Enwhitelement!

And it's official: I'm not the only one who found the pictures. Another friend told him he found them and was told to mind his own fucking business like I should've.

And he left them up? Absofuckinglutely priceless. What a moron.

He probably believes she's sleeping with you

Simple geography is going to make that an awfully damned unlikely scenario, as even this guy will understand.

Ah, duh. I missed the 3000-mile comment.

So someone else found the pictures after being directed to another section of the photobucket...this other person TOLD HIM that they were up there and accessible to anyone who had gotten a link to other sections of the photobucket...and he STILL left them up there, so that any number of other people, including people who are friends of his wife but not of him, could see them.

True elegance, not to mention attention to detail.

Downloading the pictures, I can now say that 1) yes, I do know more of the people in them and 2) given who they are, there's absolutely no way this doesn't end in divorce. Still haven't found any of her, though. Isn't that odd? (Not that I'm looking for them, it's just odd.)

1) yes, I do know more of the people in them and 2) given who they are, there's absolutely no way this doesn't end in divorce.

There's a screenplay in this for someone.

there's absolutely no way this doesn't end in divorce

Multiple divorces, even? There's a novel in all of this, my friend.

Okay, LB, you're starting to freak me out now.

You two are wrong; there's a LaBute play in this.

And since making fun of him is making me feel a little better, I want to add that these go way, way back, and that some of them appear to have been scanned.

In one of them, he's making one of those devil-horns, like he's at an Ozzy concert. Is there any way to download from Photobucket besides picture-by-picture?

Anybody spot any metadata and other chain-of-custody issues? Not that I do, it's just that there may be better and worse ways of doing this.

You could take screenshots of each index page.

Do the pictures look like the camera was set on a table or a tripod or something? If not, who's the photographer(s)? If any shots include mirrors in the background, you might be able to rack up another divorce!

IANADivorce Lawyer, but I wouldn't sweat it too much. They're pictures of him, and SEK can testify to their authenticity (that, is, that they were found at a link sent by Meathead himself.) And under divorce law in most states, I don't think adultery is going to matter all that much.

259 - Fuck, I hadn't thought of that. Fuck fuck fuck.

Yeah, well, this is part of why I said I wouldn't touch this situation with a ten foot pole. Maybe you could start having holidays at your place instead of back home?

Alright, these people obviously know they're being photographed, so when it gets out what happened, these women will know they'll have to explain themselves to their spouses. Telling their husbands isn't my responsibility, and the truth'll get around soon enough.

And holy fuck, he has been cheating on her for a long time, with seemingly hundreds of people. Most of the recent pictures are in the same room, but it doesn't look like their house.

Not that this guy sounds bright enough to think of it, but I'd be wary of sending her the cell phone number by e-mail. Who knows if he knows hoe to access her e-mail, and I suspect this is the last person on earth (him) you'd want to have your cell phone #. Maybe leave it on Mom's machine?

This is wildly intrusive and absolutely none of my business, but is there evidence one way or the other in the pictures of condom usage?

Actually, she's seen the pictures, so she knows whatever she needs to on that front.

Who knows if he knows hoe to access her e-mail

Almost a dead certainty that it logs in automatically.

If it was so many people then you were even more justified in telling her for health reasons.

269: Sounds like he's been making commercial 'amateur' porn. Somebody should look at his finances.

And what everybody says, SEK. You did the right thing.

good vibes, SEK. I think you did the right thing here, for what that's worth. If a strange car pulls into your driveway in a few hours, leave through the back door.

"SEK tears apart a Louisiana town: details at 9."

Sounds like he's been making commercial 'amateur' porn.

Not if he's hosting it on a non-protected photobucket account. I bet he just thought this was safer than keeping physical copies of the photos.

270 - Too late.

271 - No, there isn't. This is going to be ugly.

272 - I don't think she's seen them all, at least, I hope not. You can't tell who they are sometimes until you click on them.

Some of them seem to be tagged for a site called "Red Clouds."

If a strange car pulls into your driveway in a few hours, leave through the back door.

Time for that shotgun purchase dude.

And a three-way with his brother! I'm so tempted to pick up the phone and asked if they crossed sabers.

Some of them seem to be tagged for a site called "Red Clouds."

OFE was right!

I echo everyone else in saying you did right, SEK. Many sympathies are with your friend--no one deserves this kind of thing.

In addition, this thread is some incredible Internet.

I bet he just thought this was safer than keeping physical copies of the photos.

Ahahahahaha!

Gentlemen take polaroids for a reason.

If it's going to take a really long time, I could shoot you a script that would probably download them all.

God, what a disaster. Poor woman.

And a three-way with his brother!

Ho. Lee. Shit.

Red Clouds? Would seem to fit.

281: So we know he's not a feminist.

281 is so awesome.

Shit... I have to run somewhere. There should be multiple people here who can use python, urllib2, and some regex-fu (or the equivalents) to grab them all for you.

290 can't you just do it with httpget?

290 - no worries, I'm more than halfway done and he's stuck in traffic.

erm 291 from a position of complete ignorance of how photobucket sets up its pages.

Good lord. Poor woman.

In addition, this thread is some incredible Internet.

Seriously. There's a master's thesis in here.

By the by, I joke when I'm nervous, I'm not so calloused as to not know what these pictures represent.

That said, I've now seen what it looks like to go all the way with some women I only got to second base with. Fuck, why did they let him take these? Now I feel guilty, like I invaded their privacy. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Depends on how photobucket sets up their urls. I'm also not familiar with httpget - does it scrape the pages it gets back to look for links? Anyway, non-issue. Which is too bad, in a way, because of this.

292: He's telling you he's stuck in traffic? This is cracking me up -- what, is he transitioning between death threats and chatting about how annoying the other drivers are?

Hundreds of people, amateur porn, three-way with the brother...this is insane. There are really people like this? Wow.

If the guy hasn't made an amateur porn site with these pictures, SEK can.

Adam's dead on in 277.

Can we hide more of the initial letter? I'm sure I'm worrying for nothing, but I worry a bit that there will be a link, someone who knows SEK from back when will sit around with friends trying to figure out who is who, and that this will blow up into something even bigger, and with more bad consequences.

That might be my crazy talking, though.

296: Stop looking at them and downloading them. You could run accross someone you really don't want to see.

Oh, man. But you didn't, he did, and honestly? The pictures aren't all the way out yet. If your friend doesn't want to spill them, and Meathead takes them down, then not many other people necessarily know who else is involved.

298 - He was yelling at the cars in front of him a few minutes ago to move faster. He's not talking to me right now, though. Probably calling a friend and trying to get him to delete the pictures.

I had the same worry, SCMT, but this thing is going to be blown up so quickly that SEK's role in the story will be a bit one.

302: I'm happy to hide anything, but I'm not sure what the point is. Meathead already knows to blame Scott -- what other information is here?

I do wonder (as I throw a link into my livejournal) if maybe this thread entire ought to be hid somehow.

Tim's afraid Meathead is going to come after us next.

309: Or his divorce lawyer.

303: Maybe Scott will see... Scott himself!

We can take him.

304 - I'm ahead of you on this one. If he deletes them, I'm thinking I might not give her a few of them. When it gets around what happened, the people in them will know and get in touch with her. (Then again, some of these are from before they were married. I'm not studying them, though, just pulling them up, downloading them and moving on to the next.)

Nobody likes to see that their fates have been determined by a discussion among strangers. I'd hide just about anything in this thread that somebody might use as a search term.

Seriously, as horrible and awesome as this post and thread is, it might be wise to back it up for legal purposes, remove it, and replace it with a very vague post where we can continue commenting in a very vague way.

Do you have to give her any of them? I mean, if she demands them, fine; but surely she can file for divorce and say that they exist without actually having to look at the damn things.

Look at me, going all paternalistic again. Of *course* the woman should be forced to look at them.

In the messed-up play version of all this, SEK's wife comes home, finds him frantically downloading amateur porn, and the web of divorce catches SEK in its nets. Sort of a Frankenstein's monster hubris story.

: I'm happy to hide anything, but I'm not sure what the point is. Meathead already knows to blame Scott -- what other information is here?

Other people who know SEK and know groups of people from his past might be able to work out who everyone else is (roughly). I just think it's going to be hard enough being the poor woman, and fewer people knowing (independent of her specific desires otherwise) what she's having to deal with might be easier for her.

Not to mention that if this really does become a "News at 11:00" story, this thread becomes part of it. Not sure that's a good thing, either.

311: that's when this turns into a really good screenplay, not by Neil LaBute.

B, I don't think I will, if she doesn't ask for them. Knowing her, she'll probably want to see them, though, so she knows who to trust, &c.

Not to mention that if this really does become a "News at 11:00" story, this thread becomes part of it.

"Sources say that Neil LaBute has bought the rights to the story."

You guys, these people are going to be too busy to go googling Scott.

What I want is a link to the photobucket account.

I've been following this from the sidelines, recalling the running joke about all of Unfogged coming from some 47-year-old in a Kansas basement, and thinking that just this once, I really really wish that were true.

Allow me to join the chorus about you doing the right thing, SEK. I hope she doesn't hold it against you.

So this thread is an elaborate way to explain to SEK's wife why he has porn on his computer?

You really should send those pictures to multiple people for safe storage.*

*Not actual legal advice from actual divorce lawyer.

There's nothing in this thread that could be googled effectively by someone who didn't read the site already, says this veteran googler.

324 - And am secretly gay, since I seem to really, really dig this one guy's johnson.

I'll googleproof the one usage of SEK's last name -- that should cover us from google. Any RL friends of his who read unfogged, the cat's out of the bag, I think.

I don't know about that, apoptosis. Google SEK's real name and up pops the name of his blog. Google that word, which appears in the form of a link several dozen times in this thread, plus something like "high school friend" and "amateur porn", and there you go.

322: Seriously.

For those of us at work too chicken to click, what is "red clouds"?

May I recommend a stiff drink, SEK? Not too many but...a couple.

However, you would only think to look for that if you had some idea that SEK had discussed it on the internets.

329 - Thing is, there's no way they'd google "s/c/o/t/t e/r/i/c k/a/u/f/m/a/n, as I've only started using my whole name since I've been in CA. (For disambiguation purposes, as there are a lot of me out here, including one exact replica.)

324 - And am secretly gay, since I seem to really, really dig this one guy's johnson.

Naw, see, since it's just this one guy's johnson you dig, you can plausibly claim that you aren't gay, it's just this guy's johnson is unbelievable. It's him—his quiddity—which attracts you. You aren't, like, gay, though.

Clearly Ben's got that argument in his pocket ready to whip out at a moment's notice.

You know, it looks to me like SEK has some soft-core experience his own self.

332: Oh good, so this thread won't be the first google result for "sc/ot/t er/i/c ka/uf/man + female full frontal nudity".

Ben's used it before.

That's not the only thing he's ready to whip out at a moment's notice.

Um, I think I know what Photobucket page you're looking at, and before you get to the last few pictures... I kind of want to explain -- I was... going through an experimental phase at that point.

And I swear I didn't know the guy was his brother.

337 to 336.

335 pwned by the man himself.

"argument" s/b "guy's johnson"

Late to the game, but holy shit, SEK. Good move on your part - you did the right thing. She would have, I'm sure, found out eventually and when she learned that others could see these pix, the humiliation would have devastated her. She's devastated now, make no mistake, but at least she knows one of her friends had the balls to tell her the truth about it. God, can you imagine finding out months, years from now, and realizing that your 'friends' never said a word when they knew what your husband was doing behind your back? The mind reels, as the heart breaks.

And SEK, (1) well done, and (2) holy shit. Or vice versa.

Holy mackerel, SEK, this is all just crazy! (Not an original thought, I know). I one-gazillionth the statement that you did the right thing. Neither she nor the kids should need to live around a creep of such magnitude. Poor woman, I hope she has some connections somewhere else who aren't tangled up in this.

Realistically, this has already gone enough places that redacting anything in this thread isn't going to stop the blow-up. And there's probably no way this story, and this thread, doesn't become News at 11 material (moral of the story: if you're going to get into amateur internet pr0n, don't try to do it behind your spouse's back).

I just learned I was cheated on back in 1994.

Not that that compares to her, mind you, it's just strange to learn so long after the fact.

347: This is one seriously f*cked up situation.

347: This just gets better and better.

And there's probably no way this story, and this thread, doesn't become News at 11 material

No crime, no violence (or strong likelihood of any, I'd guess), it's heading for an ugly divorce, but news?

347: I told you to stop looking.

347: Aieeee. Is there anyone this guy *hasn't* fucked and photographed?

347: From a photo...or from him yelling at you over the phone? The latter I wouldn't trust.

351: Internet interest. The wonderful world of blogs, etc.

353: Ogged.

No crime, no violence (or strong likelihood of any, I'd guess)

I'm a little worried about this, too.

Would every woman in Baton Rouge who hasn't fucked Meathead please raise her hand?

Must be time for another "how come women are attracted to jerks?" thread. Those always go well.

You all know that the next wave that's gonna hit tinytown, LA is gonna be the paternity DNA tests.

SEK, You do realize that the only possible course of action now is for you to close the circle by sleeping with this woman (hopefully soon, while she's vulnerable). While it may seem morally reprehensible, it's absolutely necessary on an aesthetic level.

353 - Like I said, everyone knows everyone there. It's a "small" circle of about 300 people, but it's a circle nonetheless. Thing is, there's no way no one else knew about this. Some of these women have known each other since they were born, and are still close. They might not have known the scope, but they probably told each other about what they'd done.

354 - From a photo. He hasn't called back yet.

356: Yeah, Meathead probably wears makeup*. You know Ogged won't put up with that shit.

*What? He's on film, he has to look good.

Also, presumably you're referring to an ex-girlfriend rather than your wife, right?

Geez, Kotsko.

I guess a lot of people have had the 'tell her, or not?' dilemma, and settled on 'not'.

363 - Yes, an ex. (From my sophomore year of high school, no less.)

From a photo. He hasn't called back yet.

All right, this leaves you in the clear as far as getting beat up goes. You now have another motivation for spilling the beans other than some wussy-ass interest in the wife's feelings. Just practice saying "One of those pictures was with MY WOMAN, man. What the fuck would you do?"

I just learned I was cheated on back in 1994.

This guy is the Devil. I bet if you keep digging into the photobucket folder you'll find ancient daguerrotypes of him cheating on people back in 1894, and he mysteriously has not aged.

(Also: another vote for "you did the right thing" and "I'm sorry, this is awful").

Um, there's underage girls in these pics?

365: Still feeling bothered by the not-being-able-to-go-home-again thing?

the next wave that's gonna hit tinytown, LA

TOO SOON FOR KATRINA JOKES

My ex from sophomore year of high school had the initials SEK.

354 - From a photo. He hasn't called back yet.

So this guy has photos from 13 years ago online? That's dedication. (NTM I thought you of an age such that in 94 this guy, if he were already doing this and of an age similar to yours, must have had an honest-to-god calling.)

Wow, this got crazy. You did the right thing, SEK. Hang in there.

Damn.

371: You bitch.

Good god damn.

SEK, bravo. All of your choices were shitty. I think you chose the least shitty. Important to remember that there was no action you could take that would increase the goodness of the world, other than by committing to be a friend to her.

Keep in mind that this may take the form of her deciding she can never speak to you again. It's to the advantage of the situation that you are not as involved with these people as you once were.

Also, I like your blog, FWIW.

367 is delightful. SEK, you have my continued awe and sympathy.

368: Fuck. That's a wrinkle.

374: Mysoginist!

367 is confusing. Why would he be older in 1894 than now? 1894 was in the past.

If this gets turned into a movie, I want to be played by Sam Waterston.

This thread has me absolutely speechless.

343 and 344 get it right. And 347, holy shit.

Goddamn! I mean, this thread wins the internet. Or something.

[. . . mumbles on incoherently. . .]

368: We now have evidence that SEK has sex pictures of underage women on his computer. The moral quandry -- do we call the police?

So this guy has photos from 13 years ago online?

Looks like he scanned them. Also, he's two years older than me, so he was infinitely more studly as a senior than we lowly sophomores.

Counterfly, yes, I think there are. Lawyers, dilemma, help please?

As much as I'd love to keep sitting here and hitting F5, I've got to get my ass outta here. Hang in there, SEK.

Perhaps you might want to get rid of the one with the high school student, if that seems neccessary age-wise. One can't be too careful.

368: Is 16/17 underage in Baton Rouge?

379: You forgot to mention the missing comma after "photobucket folder" in 367. You're slipping.

383: Probably don't download those.

And now he chooses to leave.

Leave his house?

383: I refer everyone to 50.

Yes, they've been deleted. I'm going to keep the screencap of them, though.

Holy Fucking Shit.

I just remembered it's almost, but not quite, April Fool's Day.

Even if they're old enough to have sex legally, the photos would still be illegal, right? Just because you're old enough to be having sex doesn't stop taking photos of it from making you a child pornographer. There was a Savage Love about this not too long ago.

Excellent, I can beat 360 now: Who wants to take bets on how long it takes Scott to beat off to these? Or how often he does so?

I am completely consistent. I am not going to report SEK to the police.

393, omg.

395: Or if he takes pictures of himself doing so?

395: My conservative estimate is that the process has been ongoing.

My finding the porno shoot of the woman I knew from college, which had been such a great story previously, now seems *totally fucking insignificant*. Thanks a lot, Kaufman.

March Meathead's Day?

386: also i misspelled "recommending" earlier.

394: Did he explain why that is? I'm guessing because the photos could still be viewed in states or countries with a different legal age limit?

396: Because moral consistency is important to me, too, I am calling them RIGHT NOW.

393

WE'VE ALL BEEN FOOLED

DAMN YOU SEK

DAMN YOU ESZTER HARGITTAI

DAMN ALL SOCIOLOGISTS OF THE INTERNET

WHERE WERE OUR CONSENT FORMS BEFORE THIS EXPERIMENT?

There are more opportunities for correction that I passed by, too. Those of you so happy to point out when I've been slipping are slipping.

I just hope he doesn't find a picture with the friend's mother. Then things could get really ugly.

391: Delete the screencaps. You downloaded them without realizing that they were underage and now that you realize, get rid of them completely. They're no good to you anyway -- any cheating that they evidence is ancient history; and you're not going to try to get this guy put away, are you?

403: My understanding was that you can't make porn with minors, regardless of the age of consent.

Have we determined that the wife is safe?

408: Hmm. Meathead does terrible thing to person SEK cares about. Meathead calls and leaves death threats on SEK's machine. SEK discovers that Meathead's gallery includes illegal illicit images of minors. Getting Meathead put away seems worthy of consideration.

393: any response from our hosts? I mean, great job if so, but you gotta fess up if it's been called.

And if not, well, good god damn, otra vez.

410: Indeed. And the rest.

you'll find ancient daguerrotypes of him cheating on people back in 1894

This is ridiculous. He'd almost certainly have cottoned on to the gelatin process by this late date.

Getting Meathead put away seems worthy of consideration.

Why? What would that accomplish?

411: Getting Meathead put away for photos he took fifteen years ago when he himself may also have been underage is going to be difficult, and also perhaps undesirable, since Meathead is still married to SEK's friend, and father of their child. Wiping the photos entirely off of SEK's computer, to prevent any kind of mixup from happening in the future to SEKself, seems like a no-brainer to me.

Why?

Spite?

411 is right.

412: April Fool's is Sunday, right?

I'll be moderately peeved but also full of admiration if this is a prank.

Wait a minute, what does 388 mean?

If it is a prank (and I don't think it is), IT DOESN'T COUNT, because it's not April 1.

408: Photobucket must have backups. However, they'll need to be frozen so they don't written over before any legal stuff starts to happen.

I have to say I'd have tagged both LB and SEK as too pedantic to pull this as a prank on 30th March.

I do think that trying to get this guy done for child porn is bogus. Richly as he deserves any bad thing that could happen to him, one teenage consensually taking pictures of another is not what those laws should reasonably be for, regardless of whether they actually do cover them.

Unless Meathead somehow manages to get himself run in for kiddie pr*n, the photos probably aren't particularly relevant to anything legal. LA doesn't require fault for divorce, does it?

425: Could have relevance to child custody.

You totally did the right thing.

If she breastfed her children at all, he was putting his children at risk for HIV. HIV is easily transmitted through breastmilk. If he gave it to her, and she didn't know, she could give it to any child she was nursing.

Did anyone else think of that?

426: Why?

415: Getting him put away for taking the pictures 15 years ago might be hard. For posting them in the present, maybe not so much.

What does it accomplish? Well, the spite part is perhaps the initial instinct. (Though the fact that he is the father of two small children potentially weighs against that.) If the threats of bodily harm are credible, that might be a consideration. In some states, child pornography is punished more severely than actual physical abuse because of the continuing nature of the harm caused by the pictures and the effect the existence of such pictures has on perpetuating that type of crime.

Not saying he should get him put away, just saying it's not a totally preposterous idea to consider.

425: Could be relevant to custody issues. Also, if he has a secret stash of money somewhere from his amateur porn business, then she is entitled to some of that cash. Still, if I were you, I wouldn't keep the pictures.

428: Well, I'm not talking specifically about the 15+year-old, technically-kiddy-porn pix in particular.

By the way, if any of you have been wanting to beat up SEK, this would be a great time to do it and have suspicion fall on someone else.

Wow. Did I miss anything?

Also, does this remind anybody else of the first few minutes of Idiocracy?

430, 431: I'm not a divorce lawyer and it's been a long time since law school, but my recollection was that evidence of a parent's marital misconduct isn't generally admissible on custody issues, on the theory that you need misbehavior directed at the kids themselves rather than just general assholiness to justify denying custody or visitation. Is that not correct?

Just got off the phone with a mutual friend -- she's sedated, at a friend of her mother's, and he's driving around trying to find her. Also, everyone knew about the cheating, many about the photos, but no one had the nerve to tell her.

For the record, illegal photos and captures deleted. My computer is 100% clean.

By the way, if any of you have been wanting to beat up SEK, this would be a great time to do it and have suspicion fall on someone else.

All joking aside, SEK needs to watch his ass. My shotgun comment was no joke. This dude is at least semi nuts, and people have gotten hurt for less.

Not trying to overly freak you out Scott, and I think you did the right thing, but keep your eyes open.

427: No. The rest of us figured that giving HIV to the wife was bad enough, and failed to move past that to thinking of her merely in her role as milk delivery system. Our bad.

434 me.

Also, everyone knew about the cheating, many about the photos, but no one had the nerve to tell her.

Dear god.

425: Even if fault isn't required, sometimes it is an option. In my state, it can make the difference btw a two year waiting period (no-fault) and no waiting period (fault). If he is likely to be a prick about the divorce, it might prove useful to have concrete evidence of fault.

Also (input divorce lawyers?), couldn't they potentially be a negotiating tool when working out custody/property issues? As in, "We can settle this quickly and cleanly, or we can take it to trial where I'll have no choice but to put on all the evidence... " (Or does that verge on extortion...?)

Also, everyone knew about the cheating, many about the photos, but no one had the nerve to tell her.

Jesus.

Good work, Scott. Has anyone involved the cops yet? "Driving around looking for her" doesn't sound good to me. And if she has relatives who are cops, one of them might should be with her for a while.

436 - He lives a long, long way away, so I'm not immediately concerned. From what I gathered, however, he's the only one upset with me. Seems like everyone else is relieved someone else told her.

Suddenly my initial advice sounds really really craven and lousy. I have to admit that I didn't realize the scale -- I was thinking five or six pictures of two or three people.

" (Or does that verge on extortion...?) It's just pointing out the downside of a contemplated course of action. Been there, done that.

Where were all of these people who knew back when they were getting married?

Suddenly my initial advice sounds really really craven and lousy. I have to admit that I didn't realize the scale -- I was thinking five or six pictures of two or three people.

Well, yes. During this comment thread it seems that the situation as we understand it has gone from "he has a mistress or possibly mistresses, although maybe it's over now" to being a full-fledged double life.

Also, everyone knew about the cheating, many about the photos, but no one had the nerve to tell her.

Christ almighty. Scott is teh hero.

443 sheesh way to confirm my heretofore unfounded biases about small towns.

432: I'm putting a Higher Eclecticism posse together as we speak.

No, LB, your advice was sound. I don't think there was any good way to deal with this. I will say, however, thank you to everyone for giving me the courage to make the call. That's what I really needed, to be honest, and I don't think I would've done it without a chorus of people telling me to. (Wish I could say I would, but I'd already been chickening out for the better part of a week.)

What an awful way for your marriage to end. And those poor kids.

I hope her other so-called friends are more supportive now than they were before.*

*Yes, I am absolutely making a judgment that one or more of them should have told her before.

Seriously. Especially if they're in the same town and could hold her hand, and knew about the pictures (as opposed to vague rumor.)

t3it. Scott already said, before he made the call, that he gave us a restricted, abstract version. You didn't know the facts and were making reasonable assumptions. We all changed the more we knew.

449 - Baton Rouge isn't a small town. Post-Katrina, about a million people live there.

455: Good point. Guess I'll have to work on getting my heretofore unexamined biases against mid-size southern cities up to snuff.

455 Damn, you mean all this is happening just down the road? Ok, not quite...

"For the record, illegal photos and captures deleted. My computer is 100% clean. "

You do realize that "delete" does not mean your computer is clean?

Possession of child porn is bad stuff.

458 - Advice on how to clean it more permanently, then? (Deleted my cache, temp files, &c. but there has to be some better way, too.)

Nobody is going to prosecute SEK for this. Get serious.

459: don't worry about it. Don't copy them, delete the files, no one will care. I am not a lawyer.

It's still shocking to me that no one told her, and similarly but not identically that she didn't know.

459 there are drive "cleaner" programs which overwrite the blank parts of the disk, which will remove and trace of the files. Unfortunately, I appear to have forgotten how to use Google, and can't find any examples for you right now.

I'd say. Surely anyone who pulls porn off the net at all is at some risk of running into the occasional teenage picture, and is unlikely to get in trouble for it.

463, but, 460.

460: I dunno, when I called the FBI they sounded pretty interested.

I know it's only 3 p.m., but I'm fixing myself a drink, damn it.

It's still shocking to me that no one told her, and similarly but not identically that she didn't know.

Not really to me; that's the way this entire thread was leaning until 92. Don't make waves, don't say anything, none of your business, it's someone else's marriage.

You do realize that

OH GOD EVERYBODY PLEASE STOP BEGINNING SENTENCES WITH THIS! IT SERVES ONLY TO COMMUNICATE THE MESSAGE THAT "I KNOW SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE FOOLISH FOR NOT KNOWING."

I also wouldn't worry about it, SEK, but if you want to be paranoid look for software to "wipe free space." The danger is that you screw up and wipe your whole drive.

469 You do realize that we already knew this, don't you?

468: I guess, but that was when we all thought 'couple of mistresses' not 'all your friends know your husband is a porn star'.

463: For Windows, the PC Magazine utility site has one and I think the Norton Utilities has one to. I'd be a little wary of any scrubber found on the net at random. Paranoia is its own reward.

468: Gimme a break. Li'l bit different situation after 92.

467: If it's your first, that's some pretty powerful restraint. Tequila is your friend about now.

469: I'm on board with starting sentence: "I know something that you are foolish for not knowing..."

468: I don't thing that's accurate.

Rye or bourbon are also excellent post-drama drinks. A decent Scotch, even better.

478: you mean a rye, and a bourbon, followed by a decent scotch, right?

One bourbon, one scotch, and one beer?

466: As things stand, they've at least got him for obstruction of justice.

Ketel One, actually, straight from the freezer.

480 has it exactly right. Preferably while listening to Thorogood.

But SEK is already on it. Another good choice: just drink what the Russians drink.

I don't think Thorogood is the kind of pussy who'd care if some girl's guy was cheating on her.

481 indicting somebody for obstruction of justice for deleting the kidde porn pictures they accidentally downloaded is just about the awesomest idea for prosecutorial misconduct I've ever heard. Makes me want to go to law school just to try it.

482: Atta boy. Straight from the freezer, and under the circumstances straight from the bottle is probably okay too.

472: In 92, we don't know it's amateur porn. We just know she quit med school and he's probably posting for boasting. That's probably the extent of what most everyone in her hometown knew, too. One person knows of a couple pics, the other of this, a few say 'I'll confront him', a few more say 'surely someone else closer will tell her.' I'm not judging them all that harshly, but it's not really unbelievable that no one said anything, assuming that most of them didn't know the full extent.

Ketel One, actually, straight from the freezer.

Nice. Have a bottle of that in the freezer myself.

485: But he'd still see it as a darn good excuse.

Ask the Mineshaft... how to medicate with alcohol!

Jesus Christ. SEK, you are a mensch and a half. But have something to eat with that Ketel One.

Can I just say that when my plane landed and I turned on my phone, I had two text messages that said OMG YOU MUST READ UNFOGGED RIGHT NOW!!1!

One bourbon, one scotch, and one beer?

Rum, sodomy, and the lash having been covered by Meathead and his brother.

May I also apologize for my earlier advice. I didn't realize that the heroic thing was the right thing to do.

488: We also know that she would definitely not approve, that they have two young children, that he gave her shit about getting her RN after she quit med school, that he's the kind of guy who'd brag about his conquests. That gives a much clearer sense of "manipulative asshole" than the initial inquiry.

492: What, like you'd do anything else first anyway?

Jeez, I step out for a minute and I miss all the fun.

488: But still. Like, I have a casual acquaintance who is dating some girl who is pretty slutty, who slept with my good friend who is VERY slutty, repeatedly. Like at parties where a lot of mutual acquaintences went. There's other mitigating factors involved... and I don't want my friend to get stabbed, and I don't really know the other guy that well. So I'm not going to say anything, but largely because I assume the casual acquaintance knows and doesn't care.

But if a friend of mine was being blatantly cheated on by someone I knew, but less well, I might not say "hey, are you in some kind of open relationship, or what?", but I'd at least drop veiled hints. Friends watch each other's back, yes?

I don't think Standpipe would call this one of those chintzy plastic 500s.

500!

Ha!

500!

no, prolly not

Ha! indeed.

495: Yes, but the presence of a child earlier was creating a lot of 'don't rock the boat, they might divorce, just confront him' arguments. It's clear that he's a manipulative asshole in 92, but we don't find out about hundreds of pics until the mid-130s. And most of the thread (myself included) could have gone either way before 92, and maybe after, had a few people not been pushing hard for disclosure.

Chances are, her real life friends didn't know about the pictures or the extent of the cheating; they just knew she was a stay-at-home mom with two kids and a traditional husband who maybe was cheating. It's odd that an Unfogged thread might have been better informed than a long-time acquaintance, but it's not unbelievable.

shameful. i'll blame the lag here (particularly bad today)

504: Again, I don't think anyone was saying that because of the kids, he shouldn't tell her in order to prevent them from divorcing. I think reading those of us advising not telling her as making that argument does a real disservice to why we were saying that.

To be honest, I didn't even know the extent of the cheating until I clicked through to those other pages. The first I found only showed about 25 pictures. I assumed the rest would be of the same couple of girls, but all told, I'd say there were about 40 different women in them.

504: I'm still trying to figure out if the three-way with his brother is technically "incest."

Maybe his brother is 15, which would add a nice wrinkle.

Okay, but I haven't heard a good reason for worrying about the kids that didn't say "Divorce is harder with kids."

(Which isn't as many as it sounds, since they go all the way back to '93 or so. That's, what, 40 divided by 14 years is, like, 4 per year, not counting my friend?

Divorce *is* harder with kids. And there are a lot of people who know perfectly well that their spouse is cheating and choose to ignore it because they have children and don't want to put them through a divorce. Presumably people in that situation would appreciate it if their friends didn't insist on "telling them" about the cheating.

How long have they been together?

In other words, he shouldn't not tell her to "prevent" a divorce; he might want to consider not telling her because it's possible she already knows and doesn't need to be embarrassed by having people who live thousands of miles away pointing it out to her.

Which is one of the main reasons why once Scott made it clear that she wasn't the type to put up with something like that, and that the guy was the type to take advantage and lie, my answer changed.

4 out-of-marriage partners per year is pretty damn audacious.

4 per year

That would consent to having their picture taken. I suspect the total number would be considerably higher.

511: Okay, that's what I thought you've been saying, so.... what am I reading in that isn't there? Hypothetical friend doesn't want to tell them because they have kids and a divorce would be hard on them. That seems to me to be saying hypothetical friend doesn't want to tell for the sake of the children in the eventual divorce.

512 - They've been off-and-on since I was in seventh grade and he was a freshman (classy, no?). They got married in '98.

Keep in mind that we're only counting the ones he photographed, or photographed and then bothered scanning into his computer.

What exactly is the tipping point at which a large number of sexual partners stops meaning "good with the ladies" and starts meaning "pathetic and gross"? (This guy is obviously way past it, but I think that keeping pictures publicly available online might be tainting the data in that regard.)

515 - I didn't even think of that. Jesus. The drink is making me melancholy. I think I'm going to take a walk.

Red Clouds seems to have a bulletin board system. I'll bet there's hours of entertainment in finding his posts and seeing what he's said. But it's a pay site...

Before I go, I should say that this guy is old money, which means something, um, more in Louisiana than elsewhere. He's society, so that's a large part of his appeal. A quick "I'm thinking of leaving my wife" after cocktails might lead somewhere. Now, to my walk.

516 before 513: Gotcha. Still 'justify bringing a marriage, and one with a baby, to an end' is something I'm pretty sure I read on this thread, so I'm gonna stick with saying I'm not reading anything in, and point out that 'she probably already knows, and would be embarassed' is an excuse that works for her local friends, too.

Not that I don't want to hate on them, too, it's just that if about three people don't post on this thread, or there's no 92, Unfogged comes to a consensus to maybe send him a mildly-worded e-mail.

518: It's not the absolute numbers so much as how you choose to go about it. An amateur porn habit that you can't give up when married (or tell your spouse about at any point prior to or during marriage) is pathetic and gross.

520: It's only $25 a year. Surely we can set up a paypal fund for someone to sign up and report back.

I didn't even think of that.

Dude, you are clearly amateur league at the debauchery imagination game. I'll sell you my consulting services for just $20/day.

448 gets it exactly right. I am getting mad on SEK's behalf at mutual friends of him and the couple in question. Fuckers.

this guy is old money

That is actually an important detail that might not make sense to people who haven't lived in the Deep South.

522: Yeah, and that would suck for her. But it doesn't follow that the right thing to do is always to tell.

'Splain? I'm not from the Deep South. Are they more likely to sleep around, or?

That is actually an important detail that might not make sense to people who haven't lived in the Deep South.

Explain?

527: "(Pseudo-)aristocratic impunity" would make sense to me, I think. Circle of friends afraid to rock the boat because the guy or his family are influential? The enwhitelement of his response to Scott being a sort of "everybody else knew their place, why didn't you" thing?

I had two friends who started dating in early highschool. After about three years he started sleeping with other people too. Despite the fact that we often seriously discussed whether someone needed to tell her, none of us ever did. We were all closer friends with him than with her, and the argument "if she hasn't noticed yet it's because she doesn't want to know" is surprisingly strong. And I guess we were all cowards.

She eventually found out from one of his other girlfriends. They broke up and stopped speaking. Eventually they got back together, and now they're married. But I think he's faithful now.

But it doesn't follow that the right thing to do is always to tell.

I don't know how many more times I have to disavow this. Totally granted!

I'm actually somewhat sympathetic to the people who didn't tell for reasons of sympathy, as I've been arguing.... christ, can someone tell me what language I've been writing in? Here I am saying, 'Go easy on the friends, they probably had partial information and didn't want to rock the boat given the kids, just as a lot of people on the thread had reservations' and I'm the one arguing you must always tell?

Lemme guess, this time I'm writing in Korean.

Can someone translate 533? I have no idea WTF Cala is saying.

ّسر؛ف فاهرنس ش بهرث نثففمث خب بهسا.

Okay, first of all, after going away for a while and coming back to read this, I cannot think of a sufficiently colorful variation on "JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!!" to do this thread justice, although I can't stop trying.

Second, I changed my answer a couple of times here, but the one where I said, "tell her," that was the right one. And for backup, I refer the reader to the story of how pissed off I was when I found out my boyfriend's wicked ways were an open secret. So, no matter how ugly this is, telling her was the right thing.

Third, I think bourbon is really what's called for here. More firepower than most other spirits, more bittersweet flavor drawn from its wooden prison, and the sadness extracted from its southern roots to help your liver give your broken heart some company. Nothing better for sorrow-drowning.

Although there's a certain appealing efficiency to vodka from the freezer.

Oh, "go easy on the friends." That makes sense, but why didn't you just say so?

531: Sort of, yeah. But more along the lines of the Fitzgeraldian "the rich are different than you and me." I'm not really sure how to explain it well; I've not really lived in the *Deep* South, though my dad's family in all down in Alabama, so I'm familiar with it. Old money families are a little more in touch with the peculiarly Southern grotesquery that's often just under the polite surface.

I'll just say the story is much less surprising with that detail thrown in than it was when in my head, he was just another local redneck who stayed local and married young.

533: You must've been writing in the same language I was writing in that made you think I was saying Scott shouldn't tell because he should protect the little lady from deciding whether or not divorce was a good idea.

Apo, others... I live in Texas, and a co-worker said just the other day that he wouldn't consider Texas to be part of the South, but rather the Southwest. Agree or disagree?

Actually, Cala's 522 is the one that I had to read three times before parsing. But I'm fine with that.

540: Totally. Texas is not part of the South, or even the Southwest, really. It's Texas. But it's more the Southwest than the South.

I consider Texas its own region, but I'm not much acquainted with the Southwest. Definitely not part of the South™.

Eh, it's kinda halfway between the two. Parts of it are Southwesty, though.

538: I would assume that pretty much everybody in the country is familiar with that dynamic, having suffered under it's effects for, oh, seven years now.

Let it never be said that WASPS lack for grotesquerie!

Dude, 437, please don't freak out about my 427 comment. I don't think of women as milk delivery systems. I'm a mother myself, and it's just that that is the first thing I would have thought of if this had happened to me when my son was still at nursing age. I was just trying to make the point that he was putting multiple members of his family-- not just his wife-- in physical danger. I wasn't trying to criticize others for not thinking of it, and I apologize if it sounded that way to you-- I was just wondering if it had occurred to anyone else.

its, damn me.

546: Got it, sorry for being a snot.

Well, my family is from (as in, my dad's great grand parents) northeast Texas, and maybe that's more South-y that other regions. It sure feels like it. I guess, Thinking about it now, I couldn't really say the same for southeast texas, or north or central or west texas, as I could for northeast texas, so maybe that is the difference.

540: I'm from Florida, and I often think of Texas as similar to Florida in that they're essentially southern culturally, but with another critical layer that gives them a decidedly distinct flavor from Alabama, etc. In Florida it's the snowbirds and the massive expansion of the tourist economy in the last 40 years; in Texas, I'd guess, it's the proximity to Mexico and maybe the desert environment that differs so much from the agrarian south.

In any case, Texas and Florida are definitely the craziest American states.

I consider Texas its own region, but I'm not much acquainted with the Southwest. Definitely not part of the South™.

It seems like Texas is indeed an independent region, but what other states are also part of Texas? I think only Oklahoma, maybe Arkansas.

I'll just say the story is much less surprising with that detail thrown in than it was when in my head, he was just another local redneck who stayed local and married young.

That was probably the image in everyone's heads after comment 262.

Bourbon. In fact, I'm going to have a Maker's on the rocks tonight in your honor. Jeebus, what a day you've had.

" Get serious."

Here? You cant be serious.

551: I do think of Oklahoma as a poorer, seedier Texas. Economically, Texas is pretty nice.

apo pretty much nailed the old money thing. It's a combination of ostentatious wealth, family connections, exclusive cotillions, and in the Louisiana version, it's all mixed up in dirty politics. Still, hard to describe.

(I may have mentioned being lab partners with a child of the Long family before, but if I haven't, suffice it to say that if he hadn't done a lick of work, someone else would've done it for him, he'd have "earned" an A, and would be in the exact same well-paying position after he graduated. As it was, he was a nice, intelligent, hard-working guy who hated that people thought he was coasting just because he could.)

548: Oh, sure, since jae's a woman you apologize to her.

552 - "Old money" does not equal "classy."

Well, I hope having imaginary friends was a good thing today. Looks like it.

this letter appears to have been missing "Dear Penthouse, I never thought it would happen to me ..." from the start, and the entire second half of the story from the finish.

SEK hope this all works out for you and your friend. The bloke sounds like a right bastard.

Having recently had someone very close to me go through a big domestic violence related emergency relocate [complete with name change] I sympathize.

East Texas is really southern. And Beaumont has the weirdest fucking accent I've ever heard. It's like southerners doing a self-parody. North Florida is also pretty southern, for what it's worth.

But half of what we call southern is just plain rural I think. Hell, I think people are people and they're equally intolerant and superstitious anywhere. You just have to know what they fear.

559 - Yes, it certainly did. Thanks again, imaginary friends.

(On a side note, for someone who never leaves the house, my life is way too exciting. Probably a good reason not to, only we're now out of alcohol. Wish me luck.)

563 -- I hope, if you are making a Ketel One run, that you have transportation other than your car.

Yep. I walk to the liquor store...and am very careful in the parking lot, lest I be hit by a car again.

gosh, #560, posted without reading the thread, looks rather callous in retrospect. but what the hell, I will allow it to stand.

566: 560 didn't strike me as being out of character, FWIW.

538, 556: Yeah, I can understand the old money thing, then, at least in outline if not the specifics of the Deep South. The Texas of the North doesn't have cotillions, but there's definitely an old money elite you'll run into in the most unlikely places.

cerebrocrat's moving description of bourbon's virtues has inspired me. I do believe I'm off to the bar.

A friend turned us on to Woodford Reserve a while back. Very nice, and quite a bit more reasonable than the really hoity-toity Bourbons (albeit pricier than the cheap stuff).

One of the other people who received the mass-mail just replied to all the addresses with a picture of the husband with the sender's wife and the text "Last June" underneath. Have I mentioned this is going to get ugly?

This guy's combination of depravity and incompetence is just stunning.

OMG, go work for a couple of hours and look what happens.

I'm torn between feeling completely heartbroken for SEK's friend and her two little kids, and being totally in awe of the hanky-wringing Southern Gothicness of it all.

this is going to get ugly

Verb tense?

/w-lfs-n

He still hasn't deleted the pictures, and obviously everyone knows about them by now. I am so glad to be 3,000 miles away from this shit-mist.

Speaking of depravity and incompetence, could any of you who are interested take a look at the latest post on my blog and tell me whether the final paragraph could be coerced or massaged into some sort of coherence? And whether the notions in paragraphs 1 and 2, which I believe to be more coherent, are at all defensible.

Thanks

570: Wait, did this guy also decide to take action today, independently of you? Or do you think he was somehow impelled by the events of today?

"I am so glad to be 3,000 miles away from this shit-mist."

It's not the heat, it's the putridity.

570: Wait, did this guy also decide to take action today, independently of you? Or do you think he was somehow impelled by the events of today?

One of the other people who received the mass-mail just replied to all the addresses with a picture of the husband with the sender's wife and the text "Last June" underneath

Precipitated by you or woulda happened anyway?

He'll still blame you of course.

570: !!!!!!!

Now I'm ungluing myself from this site and really going to the bar.

Precipitated by me, I'm guessing. I have no way of knowing this for sure, but I'm positive it'll be blamed on me.

Michael Lind in "Made in Texas" claims that East Texas remains Confederate, and that Bush is an East Texan Confederate at heart. He works it out in detail.

SEK I'm thinking Zach Braff in your role.

581: Scott's novel will be called How I Became a Homewrecker Without Even Getting Laid.

581: With no evidence, I'd have assumed that it was independent of you. Who would have told this guy? Your sedated friend? Her mom?

Texas (or at least Central Texas) is part South, part Southwest, part Midwest and part something else entirely.

I doubt it'll be blamed on you. I'm thinking that everyone who finds out they've been cheated on is going to think you're the hero of the story.

581: If anyone dares to try to tell you that this is in any way your fault, you have my blessing to say "I didn't FUCK FORTY WOMEN and PUT THEIR PICTURES ON THE INTERNET COMMA ASSHOLE."

583 - Preciousness aside, I really like Braff on Scrubs. That said, I'm not quite so goofy-looking.

585 - Some people already knew about the photos, and now with the whole thing in the open, I'm sure some of them are sharing. Hell, the people he told about the photos -- the ones he talked about today -- probably told someone who told someone, now that the whole thing's out in the open. I guess what I mean is, if I hadn't opened my mouth, no one would've said anything. Now that I have, people are talking. (And some of them are pissed.)

588 is correct.

589: A wiser man than me once said, "Three men may keep a secret, if two of them are dead." If you hadn't have opened your mouth, no one might have said anything, today. Tomorrow, who knows.

587 - Some more context: I have a reputation for having a "smart mouth" in that set, and the fact that I became an academic and moved to California inclines people to think I have "airs." There is definitely going to be charges of "West Coast liberal elitism" thrown in my direction, as well as people who complain I should've left well enough alone but couldn't, because I have to prove that I'm smarter than everyone, &c. You know, because if it hadn't been for me, he would've straightened his life out, eventually confessed to her after he'd been a good husband for some long time, but I didn't give him the opportunity to do that. Because, you know, boys will be boys, they have wild oats and what-not, &c.

590 -- "correct" s/b "Truth".

We need to define the problem properly before we can solve it. Without relationships, there's no infidelity and no jealousy.

592 -- that would be a really bizarre usage of the "West Coast liberal elitism" trope. While I can picture it, and see how it would go down, I can't at all explain how it works.

Those damned West Coat liberal elites, believing in the sanctity of marriage.

592: Eh, as long as you and yours are safe and secure, and she's safe and secure, fuck 'em. I'm impressed that you made the call; I would have chickened out, I think. I just hope that all negative repercussions fall on the deserving, somehow.

This whole thread has really been fascinating. I understand if you're traumatized, SEK, and you have a right to be, but DAMN. It's as if William Gibson channeled Faulkner.

Yeah, damn us all.

570: Oh god, forward me this email. This is so amazing.

589: Someone would have eventually told. This kind of thing doesn't stay underground forever. And it could have been a lot worse, all things considered. She's away, she's with people who love her, and she is safe.

You did the right thing.

599 to 596.

Southern Gothicness

And how.

I had kind of a busy day today. I looked in on this thread, oh, around #90. I never know what to say anyway in these Unfogged "My friend is a preop trannie and wants to have his dog have the surgery, too" threads.

But. This one isn't actually very funny, you know? Not just because I feel for SEK, but because I keep thinking, what happens when the woman in question finds this thread? Because I think she will. How would I feel? I might feel good in a way that SEK wanted to think through the problem because it bothered him and because he cared enough about me to want to work through it. I don't know how I'd feel about a huge crowd of strangers working through the worst thing ever to happen to me in my life. I guess we don't know her and she doesn't know us, so it's not like you walk into church next Sunday in your town and have all eyes glued to you because someone was talking gossip over the back fence. (Though it sounds as if that's been the case for a long time, only she didn't know it.)

The guy also sounds like a real potential threat, not to be underrated. That's also a real bad thing: it's hard to have the status quo change in that kind of way, to know that you suddenly have to watch out for a threat that you never even considered before.

I don't think there's any obvious way to google this thread -- the only risk of her finding it I can see is a bloggy acquaintance of SEK's who knows him IRL seeking it out and showing it to her. But there's an argument for taking it down in a day or two.

Tim Burke is my seekrit daddy. Along, apparently, with Ideal.

"any obvious way to google this thread"

"[SEK] sex photos" turning up a rather different set of results.

Still, it really wouldn't take much. You know this'll get linked to hell and gone. All it takes is one among the extended network of 300 (plus?) to see it. Here's hoping they're all Republicans, or luddites.

I think it is a matter of HOURS before this thing gets Boing Boing'd or something similar. The clock is ticking, people.

But. This one isn't actually very funny, you know?

It's a shitty scene for the wife and others who are finding out they were being cheated on.

But. This is extremely funny. 570 alone is a gem.

LB should just update the post asking boingboingalikes to lay off.

597: I would have gone with an anonymous email tip to Mrs. Adulterated -- that's the kind of chicken I am.

I think it is a matter of HOURS before this thing gets Boing Boing'd or something similar.

Well then, I made it all up. Pre-April Fools! Ha ha, y'all fell for it.

570 is pretty amazing, yeah.

The whole thing is pretty irresistable as a story of our times; I will not be surprised if SEK and his friend are fielding calls from reporters in about four or five days.

Seriously though, if she finds it, it won't change her opinion of me at all. She's known me since we were nine, and she'll understand that I needed some encouragement to pipe up, got it, and that even if these people are strangers, they had her best intentions in mind when they gave me the advice. She'll also see people slagging her husband, which she'll appreciate...unless they get back together, of course, but if they do that, there's no chance of her talking to me ever again anyway.

I put up a request that people not link. Dunno if it'll work.

If she gets back together with her husband, then if I were you I wouldn't want to talk with her anyway: too grotesque.

616: See? This is why tattling is not always a good idea.

608 raises a question in my mind -- are Unfogged threads the kind of thing people send to their friends saying "Check out this wacky thread"? I do that ir similar with a lot of web pages, annoyingly often I expect, but can't really picture how I would recommend to someone immersing themselves in one of these conversations who was not already a part of it. Well except for the "Fuck You, Clown" thread I guess.

"that or similar"

612: I'm still holding out hope that this is the actual truth, but I suppose not.

As for folks worried about the discovery of this thread by the principals, I wouldn't worry. There has been considerably more humiliation posted on the interwebs for the folks involved than anyone here can muster using mere words.

I wonder about that too. The place has gotten injokier and injokier over the last year or so -- I don't know if it's comprehensible at all to someone who isn't a fulltime lurker. But this thread anyone could read: there's no hidden backstory.

Huh. It seemed injokier to me when I started lurking, but that was probably because I didn't know any of the injokes yet.

Results 1 - 10 of about 174,000 for unfogged thread

first result

621: I have been a lurker here several years - I commented for the first time just the other day. I still don't get most of the in-jokes.

But today, for the first time, I mentioned this place to my wife. If you're trying to drive web traffic, this is definitely the way to go.

624 -- heh.

I still don't get most of the in-jokes.

Go read all of the archives, then it will make sense.

But this thread anyone could read: there's no hidden backstory.

Every time LB says that it cracks me up all over again.

Didtn' she only say it but the once?

625: I've been a regular commenter for just over two years, and I think I'm starting to forget what all the in jokes are.

Chopper, you've got the mainstay doggerel on the harpy trolley. #476, snitches. Liver pudding!

Chopper has forgotten more than the rest of you bitches will ever know.

631 reads like my high school yearbook.

631 reads like everybody's high school yearbooks. Until they started in with the goddamn text messaging and iPoods and Facebooks. Damn kids!

Is 631 actually composed of Unfogged injokes? Because I don't recognize any of them.

635: There's an index at Standpipe's.

632: I remember both of your previous handles. And text's. And Brock Landers'.

Man are you trying to start something here? Cause I'm up for it, if you're trying to start something, fucker.

459: For securely cleaning erasing files on Windows, or clearing the non-allocated space on the drive, I recommend Eraser. It's freeware.

http://www.heidi.ie/eraser/

Gah. I totally fucked up the liver pudding bit. It really is all in the delivery.

Standpipe is Walter Sobchak.