On 2/7/11 5:07 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 2/7/11 4:13 PM, Gene wrote:
On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 15:19:36 -0500, "A.True.Boater"
wrote:

Cyber-stalking: ......

snip

You definition is rather vague.....

I posted this before, when this same subject arose, I'll do so, again:

http://www.haltabuse.org/resources/laws/

The laws in Connecticut are basically a more detailed description of the
definition I posted. Since Donnie has stated for many many years that
he believed EVERYONE in rec.boats should have to post their personal
information before allowing to make post in rec.boats, he can't suddenly
say that he was caused distress or was "harassed, annoyed, alarmed or
terrorized or was threatened to be killed or physically injured.

Since Donnie also published Tosk's personal information in rec.boats he
can't suddenly say he believed that this action would meet the criteria
of cyber-stalking. Since Donnie has made numerous insults including
stated that Tosk was guilty of pedophilia he obviously doesn't believe
insults in rec.boats meet the criteria of being considered cyber-stalking.

If Donnie doesn't want a photo of his house posted in a public forum, he
should have followed the advice posted in rec.boats for many years, and
that is DON'T post private information in a public forum. Donnie can't
suddenly say he wasn't aware that this could happen, when their are
hundreds of post concerning this topic, and hundreds of post by Donnie
stating that private information should be a requirement of posting in
rec.boats. Donnie can't even plead ignorance.

The only one who has committed a crime here is Paul...

Paul's post would probably qualify as a legitimate threat to conspire to
cause distress.