The original story is this weird_conversation_with_someone_who_claims_to_be_a_cambridge_graduated_doctor.
Medic with codename 083083 sent me this the following threatening message:
Sharing the story alone would have been fine, it is rather unnecessary to share his full name, photos and provide links to his Facebook profile. Also, why do you use his race to describe him? Is that necessary? I am quite horrified at this article and if he finds it, it could be classified as bullying. I really think you should re-write (or delete) this without personal information. I am quite tempted to forward this to UEA as this is really quite a personal attack on someone that you don't know.
To decipher 083083, please look up ASCII conversion table. While I agree it is not really necessary to reveal the personal information for the person in question. I really did not like the threatening tone of the person who sent me the message. I made some of the changes requested, and I sent the following response.
I have yet to receive response from the person in question.
I do believe my response was interesting, in the sense that I managed to cite a Star Trek film, indirectly call that person rude and stupid, educate that person on basic negotiation strategy, and finally tell that person to work on their clinical skill.
I had a careful think about your initial message. Here is my official response. I do not completely agree with what you said. While I partially agree that it is “rather unnecessary to share his full name, photos and provide links to his Facebook profile”. I do not agree that it could be classified as bullying. I do not believe what I wrote constitute a “quite a personal attack on someone that you don't know”.
I do not believe what I wrote fits any of the definition of bullying on UK Government's website . The only part that my blog post might have violated could be “spreading malicious rumours”, however I have backed up my claim with evidence. Furthermore, even if it is bullying, technically is not actually against the law, according to .
The race description of him is a rather important part of the story, as he runs an African themed music show. That was partly how I decided that the Cam FM programme page he showed me did not belong to someone else. Ethnicity data is recorded by the police, when they perform activities such as “stop and search”, issuing of fixed penalties, arrest, and custody of individuals, and is recorded on a number of police databases . Therefore when you report a suspect to the police, you would include the suspect's racial description. This blog post is my own record of suspicious behaviour from another member of public, therefore I do believe it is right to include his racial description.
Furthermore, I do believe there are some merits to share his personal details, as he presented himself to be a privacy-concious person, he even attempted to educate me the importance of being privacy-conscious. Sharing his personal details shows the irony of the story. Furthermore, the details I gathered are all available from public sources. The information is out there already. However, I do agree it is better not to share his personal details from a compassion perspective.
Finally, this blog post is not a “personal attack”, it simply described the what I saw and heard, and my thought process of interpreting the situation. They are statement of facts and speculation. I did not attack the character or demeanour of the person I interacted with. I simply stated the reasons why I did not believe what he said.
I would love to know what you wanted to achieve by forwarding the post to UEA. The website which this blog post appeared on had been operating since before my arrival to UEA. The event occured when I was outside UEA on a personal trip that was unrelated to UEA. The blog post described another member of public who is unrelated to UEA. Please point out which regulation my blog post violated, prior to the modification I made.
While I do believe your suggestion has some moral basis, I do not believe your request had any legal or even ethical basis.
In all honesty, I only entertained your request because you are a medic. I do not believe we have met in real life, however we have 26 mutual friends. I am a firm believer that you lot are all lovely people. I once extracted data from a broken laptop for someone in your year. After I fixed the laptop, he insisted that I should keep it. Someone in the year above you gave me the confidence to start running. I recently developed a massive crush towards someone in your year, although I do not believe she is in our mutual friend list. However I do not believe the threat you made was a “credible threat” , mainly because you did not point out which regulation I violated. Even if you did point out the regulation I violated, you should have pointed out the consequences of violating the regulation.
I do not like threats, especially the non-credible ones. Quite frankly, I find them rude and stupid. I normally would fight back a non-credible threat all the way through even if I am morally wrong, as long as I have any legal basis, just for the entertainment value. I do enjoy good debates. However, in this case, because I am emotionally compromised  primarily due to my infatuation toward someone in your year. I decided to back down. I do question the rationality behind my decision .
Anyway, to get other people to do what you want them to do, there are primarily two primary ways of doing it, you either act nicely to motivate them, or you make credible threats . I do not believe you have any basis to make a credible threat in this case, I believe you should have acted more nicely. You might want to work on your RAV skills .
I hope you found this message entertaining.
 Chapter 2, Section 3, https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/49603/1/2014Marsden.pdf