Reply to post:

Nice article, except that's its central theme is morality, assumes all site users are good people doing nothing wrong registering/interacting with a site aimed at committing immoral deeds & includes the sentence, "So even the tiny minority of AM users who actually have had affairs behind their partners' backs are GOOD people who have done NOTHING wrong." Nice CAPS-we don't believe u. They may be good people, I'm not convinced your name being on the list = ur a bad person, tho It's sketchy @the least, but isn't a great determiner of character here, No that's relative to the individual & their situation, people aren't lost on that. No, the idea IS EXACTLY THIS- your name is on the list bc YES U PROBABLY DID OR CONSIDERED DOING SOMETHING WRONG. (YAY IF U DIDNT GO THRU WITH IT, talk to ur partner about it & have a healing moment, they'll believe u if your being genuine, and if they don't forgive u, well that isn't a morality issue it's a personal preference, what ur allowed to have re: YOUR relationships, boundaries exist, are relative & shouldn't be crossed if u intend to stay in the relshp. IT IS, by its very nature, a vehicle to commit a wrong-adultery. This is established by the very site + it's ads + slogan + overall reason for the leak. unless indicated by their profile or by the person that it was in fact a joint operation of Spouses, yes they have done something wrong. Nice use of caps there. but please, keep telling yourself that over and over, writing A "journalism" article on why basically the entire population & generations of people before us have been confusing the age old concept of morality. Though u did mention one half-fair thing- that the people who look the stuff up have a part in the immorality as well-except not to the extent u mentioned-as not everyone is being is trying to blow whistles on good honest people but their own partner, not something u exactly want to share with the world or boast ab. someone purely looking for answers to their lie of a union bc their partner is incapable emitting truth and stuck in a bad situation may need that ray of truth to finally leave> find Some1 worthy of their love & care who takes promises seriously. BUT if ur an a.hole who's sole purpose is outing any1 who's situation is unknown to u, then yeah that's wrong and 2 don't make a right, it's as basic and simple as motive. TRUE Motive determines wrong, & nothing pure motivates a user to navigate acheating site. But to hold the position in an article including CAPS Emphasis defending this BS, I'd be skeptical of you. A journalist, like you, should know better than to sign up w real names, etc for "research" -ESP if you have a partner. Why would not use a pseudonym for such a seedy project? what kind of research, journalistically, can be done on an extramarital site? Bc if u are t going thru with the process, why would u write some review, article on what essentially is an incomplete experience? What kind of research BEFORE THE LEAK would even be helpful if it didn't cover the affair, the whole experience promised by the site? How's an article ab this site even interesting to people if it doesn't cover the part that's the whole point of registering anyway? Last I realized, journalists are people too, like everyone else-and that title doesn't simply exclude them from criticism, you should have used a pseudonym.