|
I get the feeling that people are thinking... "this wouldn't upset me" or "it doesn't make sense for her to be upset" and think that it decides the issue. The truth of the matter is, she *was* upset. And he knew it. And he harassed her.
What is the problem in seeing that part of it? Okay, assume the least generous case for Cheshire for a moment. Presume she just screwed up and her name really is in her headers. Further presume that she *should* have seen it. Fine. Now we get to the point where she was surprised about him knowing her name. Just take that simple fact, followed by the fact that it upset her. When he saw this, he had the choice to set things straight, and educate her about the privacy breach. He did not. He played.
Isn't is easy to see how insensitive and creepy he was?
Let's take this a step further. Assuming he just didn't understand how much he had freaked her out. It might happen. However, she persistently explained it to him, and asked for more information. At some point, he had all the information to know how upset she was, and what he could do to help it. However, he did not use that information... He continued to argue with her about it.
Worst case scenario and Cheshire is still right. And I am guessing that worst case is a long ways from the truth. We have here a very simple case of creepy guy.
And remember. It is her information. It isn't up to anyone but her to decide how private she wants it kept, and at what level it scares her for people to know it. Explaining why she "shouldn't" be upset doesn't somehow make MrThumbs right.
|