From: CoolCly | #150
There's an argument to be made that he shouldn't have posted it online for everyone to see. That it humiliated the girl in ways she won't recover from. But I think it's clear from the video itself and his subsequent posts that he that he wasn't trying to get internet stardom or anything. He just wanted to get the message through to his daughter about what she did wrong and why she was being punished, and he thought it'd be good for her friends to get that message too. It seems like the girl isn't just socially mortified over it either.
Well now hold on a second. He DID say:
Do I regret keeping it on Facebook long enough to cause this stir? Yes.
That was one of the main points of contention I and others had with what he did. That and the invasion of privacy aspect, although that one seems to have been okay: the daughter's internet usage was "on probation" from previous offenses, so it was less an invasion of privacy and more not letting her skirt the agreed-upon supervision. She had no reasonable expectation of privacy in this situation, so reading it wasn't an invasion.
All in all the subsequent comments make him come off a lot better than the original video did. I still think the publicization of this was bad, and while he does seem to agree, I think he's downplaying what he's at fault for and skirting responsibility a bit in that way.
Still wouldn't have shot it myself, that's just wasteful. I think it would have been better if he'd donated it. Then it would have done someone some good, the daughter still wouldn't have had it, and he could have snuck in a lesson that you don't always have to stick to what you said you'd do when you said you'd do something stupid.
He just wanted to get the message through to his daughter about what she did wrong and why she was being punished, and he thought it'd be good for her friends to get that message too.
He's not their parent, not his place to do that.
--
SuperNiceDog may be the Guru Champion...
But SuperBowlGiants are the NFL Champions!