I'd like to add this thought, as per the linky in the above comment, I did think the question was rogue, but who am I to judge?!

I could be very well wrong on that type of question asked, and my thinking was "Was that a very deceptive social-engineering ploy to extract information?" but I digress.

Obviously, the line needs to be drawn, perhaps, by limiting the answer to those type of questions with a certain reputation level maybe? i.e. if the question posed, is of a nature where it elicits an answer that involves a form of hacking or exploiting the handset, whether benign intentions or unintentional (as in "Whoops I fouled up and now I cannot get into my handset"), a reputation of say 5,000 can view the answer as a result of gaining that level of trust by the community!

But on the other hand, if an answer is posted for all to see, it WILL be abused and misused for whatever exploitation techniques regardlessly for whatever reasons that would be outside of the domain of the community.

That question, meanwhile was bizarre to say the least! But refrained from answering publicly in case it turns out to be false, i.e. Was it a stolen handset and that the OP was trying to extract data from it but then again, the OP did dodge it by back-tracking over the gmail and switched tactics about yahoo mail hence the comments in the said question.

Might as well answer it in morse code or ROT13 or whatnot to avoid attention to any potential answer to that kind of question .... :P

I'd like to add this thought, as per the linky in the above comment, I did think the question was rogue, but who am I to judge?!

I could be very well wrong on that type of question asked, and my thinking was "Was that a very deceptive social-engineering ploy to extract information?" but I digress.

Obviously, the line needs to be drawn, perhaps, by limiting the answer to those type of questions with a certain reputation level maybe? i.e. if the question posed, is of a nature where it elicits an answer that involves a form of hacking or exploiting the handset, whether benign intentions or unintentional (as in "Whoops I fouled up and now I cannot get into my handset"), a reputation of say 5,000 can view the answer as a result of gaining that level of trust by the community!

But on the other hand, if an answer is posted for all to see, it WILL be abused and misused for whatever exploitation techniques regardlessly for whatever reasons that would be outside of the domain of the community.

That question, meanwhile was bizarre to say the least! But refrained from answering publicly in case it turns out to be false, i.e. Was it a stolen handset and that the OP was trying to extract data from it but then again, the OP did dodge it by back-tracking over the gmail and switched tactics about yahoo mail hence the comments in the said question.

I'd like to add this thought, as per the linky in the above comment, I did think the question was rogue, but who am I to judge?!

I could be very well wrong on that type of question asked, and my thinking was "Was that a very deceptive social-engineering ploy to extract information?" but I digress.

Obviously, the line needs to be drawn, perhaps, by limiting the answer to those type of questions with a certain reputation level maybe? i.e. if the question posed, is of a nature where it elicits an answer that involves a form of hacking or exploiting the handset, whether benign intentions or unintentional (as in "Whoops I fouled up and now I cannot get into my handset"), a reputation of say 5,000 can view the answer, in order to gain that level of community trust!

But on the other hand, if an answer is posted for all to see, it WILL be abused and misused for whatever exploitation techniques.

That question, meanwhile was bizarre to say the least! But refrained from answering publicly in case it turns out to be false, i.e. Was it a stolen handset and that the OP was trying to extract data from it but then again, the OP did dodge it by back-tracking over the gmail and switched tactics about yahoo mail hence the comments in the said question.

Might as well answer it in morse code or ROT13 or whatnot to avoid attention to any potential answer to that kind of question .... :P

I'd like to add this thought, as per the linky in the above comment, I did think the question was rogue, but who am I to judge?!

I could be very well wrong on that type of question asked, and my thinking was "Was that a very deceptive social-engineering ploy to extract information?" but I digress.

Obviously, the line needs to be drawn, perhaps, by limiting the answer to those type of questions with a certain reputation level maybe? i.e. if the question posed, is of a nature where it elicits an answer that involves a form of hacking or exploiting the handset, whether benign intentions or unintentional (as in "Whoops I fouled up and now I cannot get into my handset"), a reputation of say 5,000 can view the answer as a result of gaining that level of trust by the community!

But on the other hand, if an answer is posted for all to see, it WILL be abused and misused for whatever exploitation techniques regardlessly for whatever reasons that would be outside of the domain of the community.

That question, meanwhile was bizarre to say the least! But refrained from answering publicly in case it turns out to be false, i.e. Was it a stolen handset and that the OP was trying to extract data from it but then again, the OP did dodge it by back-tracking over the gmail and switched tactics about yahoo mail hence the comments in the said question.

Might as well answer it in morse code or ROT13 or whatnot to avoid attention to any potential answer to that kind of question .... :P