Internet trolls face up to two years in jail under new laws

[MoonlessNight]

"Provoke the target into attacking you online".
Ma'am, if you are of weak enough character that you can be provoked to the point of threatening someone's safety, it is not the fault of the person provoking you. It is your inability to turn it off.
"You can only control your own behaviour, not someone else's"....famous counselling line that is as true as the day is long.

I didn't think that anyone would support the government taking legal action against bullied children simply because their bullies managed to provoke them into saying something stupid.

 

[rambot]

I didn't think that anyone would support the government taking legal action against bullied children simply because their bullies managed to provoke them into saying something stupid.

whoa. Sorry. Perhaps I miscommunicated but it seems you totally missed my point.

 

[Liza B.]

I cannot recommend that in today’s world with the number of unhinged individuals out there.

Many of the unhinged individuals are in D.C., trying to run our lives. In fact, I'm convinced the most savvy of them flock there. Do not doubt this.

 

[Liza B.]

Internet trolls face longer sentences



"Internet trolls could face up to two years in jail under new laws, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has said.

He told the Mail on Sunday quadrupling the current maximum six-month term showed his determination to "take a stand against a baying cyber-mob".

Mr Grayling was speaking days after TV presenter Chloe Madeley suffered online abuse, which Mr Grayling described as "crude and degrading".

She has welcomed the proposed laws but said social media should be regulated."

When you give the gov't power over your speech, this is exactly what happens. Tragically, most Brits and a good number of naive people in the States think the gov't will always regulate speech for the good.

Silly, short-sighted, and really, quite stupid. But there we are. Let the chips fall where they may.

 

[Gadarene]

It depends what they mean by trolling.

If they mean threatening people, (a) that’s not trolling, stop appropriating our memes you normie scum (and surely we have laws against threatening behaviour already), (b) will this just mean in practice any time a woman gets mean tweets guys get arrested while guys get death threats to a greater degree and no-one bats an eyelid? Because that’s pretty much the perception of what constitutes online abuse and harassment at the moment.

 

[Gadarene]

My (fairly obvious) first concern is who defines what a troll is. Gven my preponderance for sacred-cow tipping (which I do try to do on an equal-opportunity basis) am I a troll? Is this likely to be restricted to below-the-line in comment sections or is being unreasonably hateful and fact-twisting in the body of articles fair game for this sort of crackdown?

I will openly admit to being a troll, by the traditional definition of the word, because I think trolling is vital and serves a purpose. Without them, online spaces become echo chambers. Trolling does not mean threatening people, darn normies etc.

If I ever have to physically threaten someone to wind them up, I’m clearly not doing my job properly.

If so then I'm positively looking forward to the Mail's day in court (and the Guardian's too)

And you make a great point about the content vs comments distinction, which always struck me as rather elitist. I think it was on the guardian I learnt the phrase ‘above-the-line-trolling’, I.e. blatantly stilted, incendiary content for the sake of clicks, though I suppose that’s just called clickbait now. There is plenty of ‘official’ content that is harmful in that sense, and quite a lot of it in newspapers of all stripes, but I suspect this law will only target the plebs with unsanctioned opinions.

 

[brinny]

Internet trolls face up to two years in jail under new laws

I'm thinkin' this should apply to the "paid" internet trolls, in particular.

And in that case they should get waaaay more time.

 

[Terminal_Marxicity]

Internet trolls face longer sentences



"Internet trolls could face up to two years in jail under new laws, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has said.

He told the Mail on Sunday quadrupling the current maximum six-month term showed his determination to "take a stand against a baying cyber-mob".

Mr Grayling was speaking days after TV presenter Chloe Madeley suffered online abuse, which Mr Grayling described as "crude and degrading".

She has welcomed the proposed laws but said social media should be regulated."

Orwell would be proud. Thank God I live in America with free speech and the guns to defend it from a government like this.

 

[Terminal_Marxicity]

Internet trolls face up to two years in jail under new laws

I'm thinkin' this should apply to the "paid" internet trolls, in particular.

And in that case they should get waaaay more time.

I'm thinking millions of us would exercise our 2nd Amendment rights against public servants who commit treason by violating the First Amendment.

 

[Terminal_Marxicity]

I would like the government to remain away from this as the right to free speech is at risk. But what I am in favor of is removing the ability to speak from behind the mask of made up screen names. We should speak openly as who we are, and if we are uncomfortable doing that, then we probably don't need to be saying it. Most of the trouble makers I see, especially on Facebook, are people writing nasty things but hiding behind made up names.

The right to maintain online anonymity is essential in maintaining free speech on the internet.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I would like the government to remain away from this as the right to free speech is at risk. But what I am in favor of is removing the ability to speak from behind the mask of made up screen names. We should speak openly as who we are, and if we are uncomfortable doing that, then we probably don't need to be saying it. Most of the trouble makers I see, especially on Facebook, are people writing nasty things but hiding behind made up names.

The problem with that, Ken, is that 1) some of us don't have our hansom looks any longer so we're hesitant to post a picture of ourselves and scare people off, 2) some people on CF have spoken about some very delicate and personal circumstances which they may not want to have associated with their public identities, and 3) some of us have family members [like I do] who tell us that we have such big mouths [like I do] that we could end up unintentionally gaining the attention of someone who might wish to do us harm.

So, using made up screen names seems to be somewhat more sensible in such cases. Besides, for me, it's fun to see the creativity people use in making up their screen names and in choosing their avatars.

 

[Ken Rank]

The right to maintain online anonymity is essential in maintaining free speech on the internet.

I agree it is a right... but it is also a shield behind which cowards hide. You (I speak in general, I don't know YOU) have no accountability, and can say anything to anyone, things you probably don't say face to face and if you would, why hide behind a fake name? That is what I see often... people who might as well be drunk... meaning, given artificial power through which they berate or demean others. That doesn't add to a society, it takes from it.

 

[Ken Rank]

The problem with that, Ken, is that 1) some of us don't have our hansom looks any longer so we're hesitant to post a picture of ourselves and scare people off, 2) some people on CF have spoken about some very delicate and personal circumstances which they may not want to have associated with their public identities, and 3) some of us have family members [like I do] who tell us that we have such big mouths [like I do] that we could end up unintentionally gaining the attention of someone who might wish to do us harm.

So, using made up screen names seems to be somewhat more sensible in such cases. Besides, for me, it's fun to see the creativity people use in making up their screen names and in choosing their avatars.

I really don't disagree with you and understand that need. There are times I don't say something openly that I would like to. But... for me anyway, sometimes it isn't always healthy to blurt everything out. My point though isn't really addressing your point, it is addressing the "trolls" which is the word used in the opening post... the ones who just lurk around looking for splinters in the eyes of others while hiding from the rest of us the telephone polls they have hanging out of their eyes. Those are the people, and the situations, I wish there were something we could address.

Blessings.

 

[Belk]

I agree it is a right... but it is also a shield behind which cowards hide. You (I speak in general, I don't know YOU) have no accountability, and can say anything to anyone, things you probably don't say face to face and if you would, why hide behind a fake name? That is what I see often... people who might as well be drunk... meaning, given artificial power through which they berate or demean others. That doesn't add to a society, it takes from it.

What I'm hearing is you want to ensure we have a PC culture in which we limit our speech so others are not offended?