Reading man jailed for dead girl 'trolling' insults

Originally posted by Domo1

Ahem. Really? Flying abroad we don't expect to be able to say what we want, and that sot of undermines your point.

I was talking about the invasive procedures and groping youd get at the airport.

reply to post by Flyer


Which have absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech anyway. You really think that people should be JAILED for being jerks online? Half of ATS and the ENTIRE 9/11 forum would be locked up if that were the case. And when is that line crossed from being rude to ZOMG JAIL TIME!!!

reply to post by Domo1


Quite clearly you dont get it, Ive never seen one post on here or anywhere else that would merit a jail sentence.

The UK doesnt jail anyone for being a troll. Just people who cause death or go after people grieving which is fine.

I was talking about general freedom, not one country has it yet the Americans always bang on about how free they are but they are not.

Originally posted by Flyer
reply to post by Slavich

 

You dont have freedom, youve just been told that so much that you have that you believe it.

Go and insult a cop or try flying abroad and see how free you really are.

Edit, forgot about all they need to do is call you a "terrorist" and then they can hold and torture you for as long as they want and you have zero rights. You dont even need to be charged, never mind convicted.

edit on 13-9-2011 by Flyer because: (no reason given)

I never said we were free. I said we should be free. I think all those laws are bogus as well. I'm waiting for revolution. Please come soon.

good

just because it's on the internet does not mean real people aren't legitimatley effected or hurt by it.

reply to post by syrinx high priest

just because it's on the internet does not mean real people aren't legitimatley effected or hurt by it.

Cry me a river. People say hurtful things all the time. Would you care to draw the line for me? When is it OK to jail someone for their words, and when is it not?

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by syrinx high priest

 

just because it's on the internet does not mean real people aren't legitimatley effected or hurt by it.

Cry me a river. People say hurtful things all the time. Would you care to draw the line for me? When is it OK to jail someone for their words, and when is it not?

check your local slander and libel laws, I'm not your local lawmaker

reply to post by syrinx high priest


In no way did I assume or indicate that you were. I was asking your opinion. When do you think it is OK to lock someone up for words on the internet?

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by syrinx high priest

 

In no way did I assume or indicate that you were. I was asking your opinion. When do you think it is OK to lock someone up for words on the internet?

when they violate local laws, and someone files a formal complaint. the internet is not a free zone where you can do whatever you want because you make an ignorant assumption that you are anonymous

just post a comment here involving an implied intent to commit a crime and see what happens

reply to post by Domo1


When it causes a child/person to commit suicide or you are trolling people who are grieving a dead person.

You should give up on the thread if you cant tell the difference between that and someone saying they banged your mum last night.

reply to post by syrinx high priest


That's very true. However what alot of people here on ATS are failing to address is facebook's failure to protect it's users from malicious content. At least some of the burden rests on them being unable or unwilling to effectively moderate their website.

Here in America:

In the 1980's we had "after school specials about bullies"
In the 1990's we had "telephone tough guys"
In the 2000's we had "Social Network Trolls"...

And the real morale has been... "Don't be an (Expletive Deleted)."

I know of only two ways for social networks to handle the problem:

1. Like ATS keep Mod's on staff to respond when the tempermental moron's run out of intelligent words and resort to infantile insults. (Keep up the good work!)
2. Like FB which allows the user a limited amount of control over what they see. I.e. if someone is being a tempermental moron simply block them asap.

Ohyeah and number three... "Don't feed the troll..."
Here is an excellent educational video I found on youtube about it...
titled "Internet Bridge Troll" if you haven't watched it, give it a quick look-see...
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by lifeissacred
reply to post by syrinx high priest

 

That's very true. However what alot of people here on ATS are failing to address is facebook's failure to protect it's users from malicious content. At least some of the burden rests on them being unable or unwilling to effectively moderate their website.

I bet the user agreement that nobody reads when they sign up adresses that

Yeah this loser should be banged up...

It's not about drawing a line or arresting every person who says mean things...


This guy was truly vulgar and way, way over the top.
The guy should be in a mental institution as opposed to prison, but definitely away from people and computers.

He trolled Memorial sites of dead teenagers, one who had thrown herself under a train...even making a youtube video where he superimposed the face the dead teenager onto Thomas The Tank engine's body?? The guy's fookin' nuts.



Also from one of the article's it says this.

Trolling is an offence under the Malicious Communications Act, which carries a maximum penalty of six months in prison.

Damn.

reply to post by syrinx high priest


It is the job of the staff of a social networking site to ensure that it's users are protected from malicious content and hate speech. What this case makes clear is that facebook was unable or unwilling to help a family who were being harassed, the company should be forced to address this issue. As it stands this guy has violated the law and is facing the consequences for it, what needs to be addressed now is how to prevent future abuses of social networking in order to prevent harassment of vulnerable people.

reply to post by lifeissacred


I'm not saying facebook is without cuplability, just that they probably covered thier butts with legalese in the user agrements

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by TRiPWiRE

 

There are cases of people committing suicide (such as one of his "targets"), because of internet bullying etc.

They win the Darwin Award in my opinion. Getting trolled on the internet? Stop going on the freaking internet.

edit on 13-9-2011 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)

I know I shouldn't but - when a close relative of mine died because of harassment and bullying, I get a bit defensive.

They appeared happy, yet their inner turmoil must have been huge. People are all different and cope with situations in diverse ways. You and I may have no problem with some anonymous person having a shot at us online, but to judge everyone in such a manner really isn't very considerate.

You are basically saying everyone who commits suicide for not being able to cope with certain situations are “dumb” (hence the “Darwin award”), and deserves to die. Maybe I’m being a bit over-sensitive, yet I find this a bit… disturbing.

Having said that, if this idiot who has just been arrested did some disgusting Youtube video or facebook group about my relative I'd be happy to see them go down for it. For much longer than what this guy got too.

reply to post by lifeissacred


Agreed fully that the first responsibility should be to the staff of the site. Here on ATS we take that very seriously, which is one of the main reasons that members have an alert feature.

Obviously it's not realistic to expect large sites to see every post that's made, so alerting helps avoid a lot of potential problems.

Facebook certainly should have taken action against this person's account if his conduct was reported to them.

Personally, I believe that someone who goes online and insults people that are ill, or have passed away is depraved. Should it be illegal? I guess that's up to the local authorities. If there is such a law where this person resides, then too bad for him.

Unfortunately I've seen that kind of behavior before as well. There have been two occasions, at least since I've been Admin here in which people who don't like ATS have posted vile things about members of our community who have passed away. I don't think it's really clear cut to anyone what a person like that is thinking because mocking a person who died, who never did anything to you, is a depraved action.

The same applies to the person in this case. Clearly a very sick person with a very warped mind. I'm not sorry he's going to jail.

Social networking sites need to be more proactive in this rather than leaving it in the hands of the law. Sites like Facebook or even ATS can put such restrictions into their T&Cs and there's no problem. The solution, (IMO) lies - as always - with less government, not more.

reply to post by Domo1


Scary precedence. I would understand if it was before she committed suicide and was a contributing factor, but I don't understand how it is illegal to say disparaging things after the fact? Bad manners is not a crime, but..............

Bad manners is a quick way to some natural consequences, I think his posts should be justifiable proof in defense of the family when this guy is found with his lips stapled together, and his fingers shattered with a ball-peen hammer. The family should be able to show the "trolling" posts, and get a slap on the wrist, and some community service along with the promise to not do it again.

reply to post by syrinx high priest

just post a comment here involving an implied intent to commit a crime and see what happens

I addressed that in my OP. Perhaps you should read it again.