Trolls, keyboard warriors... ignore, block or digilantism?

One would have to be a fucking masochist to post here anymore. :)
 
Debbie has been coming to lit every day for xx years to tell us all the reasons why we shouldnt come here.

Debbie is a troll.
 
I'll be surprised if the conviction survives appellate scrutiny as sje was a juvenile at the time. And the conviction is precedent for blaming others for what we do. She told me to do it.

There are no trolls, only tender snowflakes who whine about feedback.

I believe some people have genuine reasons to be upset, disturbed or perturbed by an online troll who is at them constantly. Relentless. Trying to needle them, goad them, harass them till they feel totally worn down and emotionally upset. Especially if it is taken into real life and not just online.
 
One would have to be a fucking masochist to post here anymore. :)

The current state of the GB was set in place when Hanns Schmidt harassed sexy_girl to the point where she could no longer post, and the administrators decided his free speech rights overrode her right to be here at all.
 
The current state of the GB was set in place when Hanns Schmidt harassed sexy_girl to the point where she could no longer post, and the administrators decided his free speech rights overrode her right to be here at all.


What a crock; Sexygirl left because she left.
 
Debbie has been coming to lit every day for xx years to tell us all the reasons why we shouldnt come here.

Debbie is a troll.

No. Debbie is a hag.
She wears a trash bag.
Her tits really sag.
She must be a dag.


xxx
 
It's my belief that the laws of the GB jungle are not greater than real laws. If harassment is real and grevious it should be prosecuted and whether it upset lit land or not I am afraid I would. Not just for myself, but because shots like that are predatory.

The question is whether to not the harassment is "real"when you can avoid it by logging out.
 
An analogy. Smoking ban: Non smokers can avoid smoke by not leaving their homes, it was decided their freedom to access the world took priority.

Lit is a privately tun enterprise and is not analogous to a public space.

The stronger case has always been for me the idea that trolling, taken to extremes, may constitute a denial of services attack.
 
since lit isn't the government, its not "free speech" that is allowed, but harassment

which it totally cool, as its their site and they can do as they wish

i personally don't give attention to those who beg for it
 
I believe some people have genuine reasons to be upset, disturbed or perturbed by an online troll who is at them constantly. Relentless. Trying to needle them, goad them, harass them till they feel totally worn down and emotionally upset. Especially if it is taken into real life and not just online.

What you report I call stamp collecting to redeem for prizes. In the 50s women got stamps from stores, theypasted the stamps in books, and traded the books for linen and appliances and ;amps, etc. I traded mine for sports gear.

People collect insults, too. Collect enough unsults for a gult free whine or murder or law suit. You and your snow flake crew so the same at GEEBEE when you get feedback you hate. But rules don't require it.

99% of the time I iggy you and LTR and many, a little goes a long way.
 
Smoking bans run to public spaces including privately run enterprises and spaces. I do not propose to provide evidence of this; I never do, people can look into it themselves.

Legality is that private contract and provision can not override the law. Again; feel free to check this out.

Smoking is not a constitutionally protected right, free speech is. Analogies to smoking are not relevant.

Lit can no more be forced to ban particular legal content than a newspaper could be denied the right to espouse particular points of view.

Laurel should do something about some of the long term harassment and trolling that's gone on here for so many years, but her principles are such that she does not do so as long as posters remain within the terms of service she has adopted. I do not agree with her, but I respect that she stands firm to a sincerely held conviction.
 
Back
Top