Profile
Search
Register
Log in
The internet's biggest troll has been outed.
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > The General Forum

Author Message
metachronos



Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 454
Location: Green Bay, WI
 Reply with quote  


Quote:

Let's be real here. Like all trolls, this is a story about privilege. It's great for him to talk about niggers, to post pictures of sexualized preteen girls, to "incite reaction" from the crybabies, because he is a rich white man. He's never had to deal with racism, sexism, being on the other end of hatred. If he had his face pounded into the cement by a gang of white thugs screaming "faggot" and "chink," if hadn't been able to leave the house without catcalls and the constant threat of sexual assault since he was 11, if his mother had been in a concentration camp, he wouldn't think this was all such a joke.
I'm not saying his life has been easy or good - people who have had good lives don't start /r/picsofdeadjailbait[1] - but he took all the power and privilege in the world and used to it hurt and attack and make the world a worse place. How about the teen girls who have killed themselves over jailbait pics? How about the legions of young men he's shepherded into MRM and white-supremacist communities?
Fuck him. No sympathy.


This guy said it better than I could.
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 4:54 pm
 View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19363
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

T-Wrex wrote:
Calm down, Futur....

It's just some good ol' fashioned muckracking of a real American villain...

Dude deserved to be taken down a notch....

If my mom's, my wife's or a hypothetical-daughter's ass-in-jeans ever showed up on a candid-picture messageboard that he created and moderated, i'd want to punch him in the throat.


This dude is hardly a real American villian. He is just a sad creep with an Internet connection. I think the outrage over him is because of how impotent the pop feels in dealing with true villiany.

There's also a certain level of puritanical patriarchy at play as well. There is also as dude pointed out a certain awkwardness of going hard at a guy like this within a society which sexualizes young girls all of the time within a larger tape culture. Dude is taking on the heat for a lot of societal things that are much more nuanced and complex to deal with.
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 5:38 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19363
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

They gave him a name but kept him a cartoon
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 5:39 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8542
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

What's the alternative here? Stage a really quiet intervention at the guy's house? Lord it over him to stop him from posting? Blackmail him? Say nothing? Aside from the obvious self-righteousness of the article, I think the right thing was done. When you put yourself out there like this guy did, you're asking for trouble. Brutsch had something coming.
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 5:48 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19363
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

Captiv8 wrote:
What's the alternative here? Stage a really quiet intervention at the guy's house? Lord it over him to stop him from posting? Blackmail him? Say nothing? Aside from the obvious self-righteousness of the article, I think the right thing was done. When you put yourself out there like this guy did, you're asking for trouble. Brutsch had something coming.


It should be handled in the community. It is an issue for that community. If nothing illegal was being done and the community didn't want to stop him then ignore it and move on. Doxxing a User and causing g them to lose job and home should be reserved for the courts to work through.

This was real court repurcussions done in the court of public opinion. One one sided article with an axe to grind and dudes whole life is done. Scary stuff.
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 6:19 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Jack



Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Posts: 679
 Reply with quote  

of all the people that have their life ruined, we are gonna talk about this asshole? Should the consequences of his actions been this severe? Maybe, but probably not. But come on, no biggie homie
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 6:35 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8542
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

So you're saying this man should have been dealt with by his online community? The same ones that enjoyed sleazy, disgusting, and perverted stuff Brutsch was into? That's like saying rapists should only be dealt with by other rapists. The community is insular and self-protecting. And I'm also not entirely in agreement with the Brutsch did nothing illegal angle. He walked a very fine line, that's true, but it certainly opens him up to probable cause investigations by the FBI, which are likely to be underway. And is he not liable to exploiting/endangering children?

And on the flipside, I could argue that Chen did nothing illegal by exposing Brutsch. It was all true, so libel and slander are out. Brutsch owned up to it all anyway. Was the article morally questionable? Sure, but it was a far cry from what Violentacrez was doing. So I'm willing to allow for some muckraking and public humiliation here.

Now, onto the bigger issue of ruining someone's life. There's a difference between being vindictive, an asshole, or just careless in ruining someone's life, and doing the same because the person was reprehensible in every way. Chen didn't just pick someone at random, or call someone out for not cleaning up their dog's shit at the park. Brutsch was an arrogant and morally bankrupt pedophile (in that being a pedophile is a mentality, not necessarily followed by action). By and large, when innocent people have their lives drug into the public light unjustly the have a means of recourse and a number of organizations or people that will defend them because they are in the right. Brutsch isn't the domino that leads to massive, unwarranted crucifixions the world over.

I can't wrap my head around why you're depending this guy.
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 6:52 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
tommi teardrop



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2216
Location: Las Vegas
 Reply with quote  

I don't go on reddit and know nothing about it or this guy except for reading that article. But it seems to me that in certain online communities, stuff like this is just accepted and seen as lulz.

Were people unable to avoid his jailbait threads? The dude was obviously provoking outrage. And I find outrage to be bullshit most if the time.

I don't know. If you let people like this bother and outrage you, I think you are probably not cut out for that part of the Internet.
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 9:05 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19363
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

Captiv8 wrote:
So you're saying this man should have been dealt with by his online community? The same ones that enjoyed sleazy, disgusting, and perverted stuff Brutsch was into? That's like saying rapists should only be dealt with by other rapists. The community is insular and self-protecting.



Except that this guy wasn't a rapist. And I mean, there are parts of the internet dedicated to all kinds of things I find reprehensible--but if they're not illegal--then what am I doing wasting my time there? Like I don't get why this was a big deal for people. I had never heard of this guy before today, and had never even been on reddit before today--and yet somehow I was able to go on about my life. I don't understand why this was a thing which NEEDED redress. I mean, if you have a problem with it--isn't the problem actually with Reddit itself, and the company that owns them? They even say in the Chen article that the reason they liked dude was because he was responsible for basically driving traffic to their site and building the site up. I mean the internet is basically built on sleezy porn which bankrolls the legit stuff. I mean surely you can appreciate the irony of a site like Gawker exposing this guy for a forum called creepshots when their whole steez is celeb creep shots. It's incredible to me, how you'd want to jump freely into mob hoops without y'know...stopping for a second and thinking about why you're being asked to do this.


Quote:


And I'm also not entirely in agreement with the Brutsch did nothing illegal angle. He walked a very fine line, that's true, but it certainly opens him up to probable cause investigations by the FBI, which are likely to be underway. And is he not liable to exploiting/endangering children?



Until you know he did something illegal you can't just go around like "oh but he probably did something illegal". Anderson Cooper did a thing on him a year ago--and nothing has come of it since. It seems like his job at reddit was basically keeping things from crossing the line into illegal--so I would doubt that he himself cross any lines--considering that his usefullness to reddit seems to have been his awareness of that line.

I think if he actually had exploited or endangered children, Chen's article would have stated so. You think Chen would have pulled a punch like that if it was there? Or Anderson Cooper for that matter. Cooper's own lawyer apparently went through the site and said he found nothing that violated the law.


Quote:


And on the flipside, I could argue that Chen did nothing illegal by exposing Brutsch. It was all true, so libel and slander are out. Brutsch owned up to it all anyway. Was the article morally questionable? Sure, but it was a far cry from what Violentacrez was doing. So I'm willing to allow for some muckraking and public humiliation here.



I wasn't aware that I said what Chen did was illegal. It was only troubling to me in that what Chen did is usually reserved for taking down people with actual power--and it's a new fold we have going now where because of things like twitter and fake celeb power that people can grow--they are being taken down like celebs without any of the usual safety catches that a celeb would have.

A normal celeb that fucks up--their worth is in their person--so there is opportunity for redemption because the narrative is evolving. And they stay in the public eye enough to be given a second chance.

A non-celeb though--this shit is forever. This is the only time this guy's name is going to be everywhere. And he has no ability to ever change this. Long past after he dies--he will be a considered a nazi pedophile monster villian. Which I mean--if he had just committed a normal crime, he would serve his time, and then get back into society, and probably be given a chance to start his life back over. But being tried and hung this way eliminates any possibilty he has for redress. Even if Chen got things wrong in his article--there's nothing that can ever be done about it. This is the first and last thing that will be written about this dude.

It is IMO a misuse of Chen's power as a journalist. And shows a sad lack of restraint or perspective. But what can you expect from a site like gawker which routinely posts creepy shots of it's own of people like Lindsay Lohan, and used to have a thing on their site that you could use to stalk celebrities.

What happened with this really is that gawker got a bunch of web hits and ad money. And so did Reddit. While some plebian fly had his life ruined. And people everywhere were HAPPY about this? I guess when you are powerless to challenge real evil--going after people like this dude must feel like a real rush.



Quote:


Now, onto the bigger issue of ruining someone's life. There's a difference between being vindictive, an asshole, or just careless in ruining someone's life, and doing the same because the person was reprehensible in every way.



Reprehensible in every way? Yeaaaah I'm going to to say no on that. To me, there's no difference between this creep and AJ whatshisface that runs gawker that used to run deadspin. They're the same kind of creep merchants.



Quote:


Chen didn't just pick someone at random, or call someone out for not cleaning up their dog's shit at the park. Brutsch was an arrogant and morally bankrupt pedophile (in that being a pedophile is a mentality, not necessarily followed by action).



I don't know that he was a pedophile. Also I think jailbait fetishism is somewhat separate from what we generally equate with pedophilia. When I think of a pedophile I think of someone who wants to have sex with little kids. Jailbait fetishes are I think pretty different from that. Like the whole barely legal magazines and porn industry is marketed toward these people. I think the legality of it is actually a huge part of the fetish(thus the name jailbait/barely legal). Moreso than the actual age of the women in the pictures.

As gross as it is to separate the two--I do think it's probably important not to conflate the two as if they are the same thing.


Quote:


By and large, when innocent people have their lives drug into the public light unjustly the have a means of recourse and a number of organizations or people that will defend them because they are in the right. Brutsch isn't the domino that leads to massive, unwarranted crucifixions the world over.



What is innocent? Brutsch didn't commit any crimes that we know of. I dunno. I think it's really easy to defend people whose views you support, but when it comes to people who you think are gross, and not easy to support--I think people show their true colors when it comes to how they really feel when it comes to mob mentality bullying.


Quote:


I can't wrap my head around why you're depending this guy.


I dunno. I grew up/live in an ultra conservative part of the country, where there are no legal protections for me being transgender. Why that matters is that a lot of these right wing christians don't really distinguish between LGBT people and perverts/pedophiles. There are a lot of them that feel if you are LGBT you shouldn't be allowed to teach children or like lead a boy scout troupe or whatever--that that stuff makes you this monster who is a danger to society.

So I mean, anytime I see people mobbing up on people just because what that person does offends their sensibilities it reminds me that where I life--I could EASSSILY be next. So I'd rather fight on this front and do my best to keep the line for what is justifiable for people to mob on--as far out away from me as possible.

Maybe that means something to you--maybe it doesn't. But that's real to me.

I still remember after 9/11 people who I had grown up with, and who I thought were cool people suddenly wanting to turn places in the world they had never even heard of to glass just because of the actions of a few idiots. Stuff like this just reminds me that a lot of you completely lack human compassion, and are more interested in feeling righteous about something--then thinking about things on a human level. You are mentally unprepared to deal with the contradictions of a guy like this who can be both in the wrong, and be being wronged at the same time. You don't operate beyond this wrong has been committed so whatever happens is okay. And that's depressing to watch, and frankly scary.

If all it takes is for you to get a little outraged to justify mob rule--and I'd say the people just in this forum are probably on the higher side of education compared to the rest of the populace--so if even you guys are in that spot--that is really fucking scary.
Post Mon Oct 15, 2012 11:51 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
anomaly
Loserface


Joined: 22 May 2008
Posts: 2579
Location: DFW, TX
 Reply with quote  

futuristxen wrote:
Captiv8 wrote:
So you're saying this man should have been dealt with by his online community? The same ones that enjoyed sleazy, disgusting, and perverted stuff Brutsch was into? That's like saying rapists should only be dealt with by other rapists. The community is insular and self-protecting.



Except that this guy wasn't a rapist. And I mean, there are parts of the internet dedicated to all kinds of things I find reprehensible--but if they're not illegal--then what am I doing wasting my time there? Like I don't get why this was a big deal for people. I had never heard of this guy before today, and had never even been on reddit before today--and yet somehow I was able to go on about my life. I don't understand why this was a thing which NEEDED redress. I mean, if you have a problem with it--isn't the problem actually with Reddit itself, and the company that owns them? They even say in the Chen article that the reason they liked dude was because he was responsible for basically driving traffic to their site and building the site up. I mean the internet is basically built on sleezy porn which bankrolls the legit stuff. I mean surely you can appreciate the irony of a site like Gawker exposing this guy for a forum called creepshots when their whole steez is celeb creep shots. It's incredible to me, how you'd want to jump freely into mob hoops without y'know...stopping for a second and thinking about why you're being asked to do this.


Quote:


And I'm also not entirely in agreement with the Brutsch did nothing illegal angle. He walked a very fine line, that's true, but it certainly opens him up to probable cause investigations by the FBI, which are likely to be underway. And is he not liable to exploiting/endangering children?



Until you know he did something illegal you can't just go around like "oh but he probably did something illegal". Anderson Cooper did a thing on him a year ago--and nothing has come of it since. It seems like his job at reddit was basically keeping things from crossing the line into illegal--so I would doubt that he himself cross any lines--considering that his usefullness to reddit seems to have been his awareness of that line.

I think if he actually had exploited or endangered children, Chen's article would have stated so. You think Chen would have pulled a punch like that if it was there? Or Anderson Cooper for that matter. Cooper's own lawyer apparently went through the site and said he found nothing that violated the law.


Quote:


And on the flipside, I could argue that Chen did nothing illegal by exposing Brutsch. It was all true, so libel and slander are out. Brutsch owned up to it all anyway. Was the article morally questionable? Sure, but it was a far cry from what Violentacrez was doing. So I'm willing to allow for some muckraking and public humiliation here.



I wasn't aware that I said what Chen did was illegal. It was only troubling to me in that what Chen did is usually reserved for taking down people with actual power--and it's a new fold we have going now where because of things like twitter and fake celeb power that people can grow--they are being taken down like celebs without any of the usual safety catches that a celeb would have.

A normal celeb that fucks up--their worth is in their person--so there is opportunity for redemption because the narrative is evolving. And they stay in the public eye enough to be given a second chance.

A non-celeb though--this shit is forever. This is the only time this guy's name is going to be everywhere. And he has no ability to ever change this. Long past after he dies--he will be a considered a nazi pedophile monster villian. Which I mean--if he had just committed a normal crime, he would serve his time, and then get back into society, and probably be given a chance to start his life back over. But being tried and hung this way eliminates any possibilty he has for redress. Even if Chen got things wrong in his article--there's nothing that can ever be done about it. This is the first and last thing that will be written about this dude.

It is IMO a misuse of Chen's power as a journalist. And shows a sad lack of restraint or perspective. But what can you expect from a site like gawker which routinely posts creepy shots of it's own of people like Lindsay Lohan, and used to have a thing on their site that you could use to stalk celebrities.

What happened with this really is that gawker got a bunch of web hits and ad money. And so did Reddit. While some plebian fly had his life ruined. And people everywhere were HAPPY about this? I guess when you are powerless to challenge real evil--going after people like this dude must feel like a real rush.



Quote:


Now, onto the bigger issue of ruining someone's life. There's a difference between being vindictive, an asshole, or just careless in ruining someone's life, and doing the same because the person was reprehensible in every way.



Reprehensible in every way? Yeaaaah I'm going to to say no on that. To me, there's no difference between this creep and AJ whatshisface that runs gawker that used to run deadspin. They're the same kind of creep merchants.



Quote:


Chen didn't just pick someone at random, or call someone out for not cleaning up their dog's shit at the park. Brutsch was an arrogant and morally bankrupt pedophile (in that being a pedophile is a mentality, not necessarily followed by action).



I don't know that he was a pedophile. Also I think jailbait fetishism is somewhat separate from what we generally equate with pedophilia. When I think of a pedophile I think of someone who wants to have sex with little kids. Jailbait fetishes are I think pretty different from that. Like the whole barely legal magazines and porn industry is marketed toward these people. I think the legality of it is actually a huge part of the fetish(thus the name jailbait/barely legal). Moreso than the actual age of the women in the pictures.

As gross as it is to separate the two--I do think it's probably important not to conflate the two as if they are the same thing.


Quote:


By and large, when innocent people have their lives drug into the public light unjustly the have a means of recourse and a number of organizations or people that will defend them because they are in the right. Brutsch isn't the domino that leads to massive, unwarranted crucifixions the world over.



What is innocent? Brutsch didn't commit any crimes that we know of. I dunno. I think it's really easy to defend people whose views you support, but when it comes to people who you think are gross, and not easy to support--I think people show their true colors when it comes to how they really feel when it comes to mob mentality bullying.


Quote:


I can't wrap my head around why you're depending this guy.


I dunno. I grew up/live in an ultra conservative part of the country, where there are no legal protections for me being transgender. Why that matters is that a lot of these right wing christians don't really distinguish between LGBT people and perverts/pedophiles. There are a lot of them that feel if you are LGBT you shouldn't be allowed to teach children or like lead a boy scout troupe or whatever--that that stuff makes you this monster who is a danger to society.

So I mean, anytime I see people mobbing up on people just because what that person does offends their sensibilities it reminds me that where I life--I could EASSSILY be next. So I'd rather fight on this front and do my best to keep the line for what is justifiable for people to mob on--as far out away from me as possible.

Maybe that means something to you--maybe it doesn't. But that's real to me.

I still remember after 9/11 people who I had grown up with, and who I thought were cool people suddenly wanting to turn places in the world they had never even heard of to glass just because of the actions of a few idiots. Stuff like this just reminds me that a lot of you completely lack human compassion, and are more interested in feeling righteous about something--then thinking about things on a human level. You are mentally unprepared to deal with the contradictions of a guy like this who can be both in the wrong, and be being wronged at the same time. You don't operate beyond this wrong has been committed so whatever happens is okay. And that's depressing to watch, and frankly scary.

If all it takes is for you to get a little outraged to justify mob rule--and I'd say the people just in this forum are probably on the higher side of education compared to the rest of the populace--so if even you guys are in that spot--that is really fucking scary.



Am I the only one that sees a response like this and simply skips over it?
Post Tue Oct 16, 2012 8:25 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8542
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

Well, I read it since it was addressed to me, but I know what you mean.

I've been mulling over what you said, futurist, and I can't say that my position has changed. I do think, however, that this isn't an instance of mob mentality, which revolves around rational people being driven to do something irrational because they were incited to do so. They also felt compelled to do so because of the group. That's not what's happening here. Chen was set on Brutsch and took him down. What followed was rational people reacting in a way that I think was quite reasonable, given everything Brutsch had done. The standard "Fuck this guy", "Burn in hell", "What a piece of shit" refrains were all there, of course, and I don't think you can fault people as sliding down a slippery moral slope for condemning Brutsch.

Sure, he is still a human being, but he acted in a way that disregarded the value of other human lives. Did he kill anyone? No. Did he directly hurt someone? Not that anyone is aware of. Did he do anything illegal? Again, not that anyone is aware of. But he did reduce human lives to JPGs and GIF so other people could enjoy it. That's decidedly inhuman behavior. So you want people to have compassion, to effectively value Michael Brutsch's life because underneath that doughy and vile exterior he's probably not that bad of a guy once you get to know him? That's not likely. For myself personally, I hope Brutsch gets help and is able to turn his life around. His life isn't over; the life he knows and is comfortable with is. I think he has some mental issues that need to be resolved, first and foremost.

This pertains directly to the line you've drawn between being attracted to jailbait and pedophilia. The article states that Brutsch removed outright child pornography in his moderator position because it was illegal. But there was material with minors in swimsuits and the like. Why? Because it is not illegal. I see this as a circumvention of the law, not a "This is a guy with a weird but legal fetish" situation. Reddit doesn't give a shit because they have indemnity against what other people post, since they are the host and not the proprietor, as it were. This is a fucked up attitude, but because pornography is not the prime motivation of the site or its paid personnel it's harder to condemn them for being in the wrong. It is for me, anyway. I don't think it's right, nor do I condone it, but I don't think they're messed up people like Brutsch.

Which brings us full circle. I can appreciate your concern for having your personal life ruined, and I can do the same for people in general. I don't want to see the life of any decent human being ruined. I don't want to see the life of anyone ruined really. I don't revel in that type of thing, think that it should be done, or is any kind of way to impart a lasting lesson. But it Brutsch's case, what's done is done, and I think it was done with substantial cause. Do I feel sorry for him? Yes and no. Yes, since I think he's suffering from some kind of mental illness or problem where he thinks the things he posted are okay. At the very least, he has shown a mode of thinking that justifies immoral behavior on the basis that it isn't illegal and it's protected under the Constitution. No because he's not so insufferably ridden with mental illness as to prevent him from making adult decisions and thriving in society. He has the capacity to decipher right and wrong, demonstrated clearly by his pleas to Chen to not out him. He knew that if his online identity came out he would be ruined because the things he was doing are not acceptable in any reasonable community.

So, if Brutsch was suffering from some sort of demon and that he wanted to stop but couldn't, or if he sees the error of his ways now and wants to change, then I think this is the best thing for him. This, in the parlance of AA, is his rock bottom from which he can rebuild. It's going to take time, patience, support from others, and some resolve, but it can be done. What Brutsch does from here will really define his character. He can either wallow defensively in self-pity and continue to justify his behavior, or he can take this as an opportunity to sort his life out. The latter may or may not happen. He had this to say about the article: “My real problem is with the lies, innuendos, distortions and half-truths in Chen’s article. As for deserving it, VA [Violentacrez] did go out of his way to make people mad, even if it was only on the internet. I really have no one to blame but myself.” At least he says his own role in this, which is good.

Then again, he's also cashing in his support from fellow Redditors and others by opening up a paypal account for donations. This information, and the quote above, is from both a Salon.com and Huffington Post article. Maybe the money is in part to pay for his disabled wife's care. Maybe not. A little more time needs to go by before we can truly assess what kind of person Brutsch is at his core.
Post Tue Oct 16, 2012 9:23 am
 View user's profile Send private message
crash



Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 5456
Location: the chocolate city with a marshmallow center and a graham cracker crust of corruption
 Reply with quote  

i think it's important to draw a distinction between the casual racism and sexism and the jailbait pictures. the racism, sexism, and homophobia you see on 4chan and certain subreddits is almost entirely about trolling. of course that sort of language can be hurtful, but within the confines of the internet, it means a lot less than IRL because it's taken for granted that everyone is full of shit. you're in a place where you can't verify anyone's identity or true intentions and the entire conversation is taking place in a venue that removes it from the consequences of real life.

the jailbait pictures on the other hand are by there very nature tied to real life - they can very easily be a source of shame and suffering for their subjects. the poster retains the anonymity, but the subject in the photo does not. in that way i think the adage that it's "just the internet" doesn't work anymore.
Post Tue Oct 16, 2012 9:56 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
the mean
Certified O.G.


Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 6497
Location: philly/sacto/kauai/ohio
 Reply with quote  

I could never get with the idea that someone had a right to be a creep online without any repercussions. The internets are real life just as any other form of communication is.

No matter how many words futurist writes about it.
Post Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:12 am
 View user's profile Send private message
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19363
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

the mean wrote:
I could never get with the idea that someone had a right to be a creep online without any repercussions. The internets are real life just as any other form of communication is.

No matter how many words futurist writes about it.


So I mean, you'd be okay with anti-abortion groups that published the names and addresses of abortion doctors to their list of crazies?

Or you'd be fine if an LGBT person was outted IRL because of their postings on the internet and because they lived in the wrong part of the country they suffered repercussions from that?

Mob justice isn't justice. And just because in this situation it's super easy to feel right about destroying this guy's life--doesn't mean that the next time it happens you will feel so right. There should be a line between disagreeing with what someone is about and what they do--and the extent you will go to attack them and ruin their life.
Post Tue Oct 16, 2012 12:21 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
JohnSchwan



Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 667
Location: Baton Rouge, LA/MA
 Reply with quote  

Just so we can be clear here, you're equating a man who posted images of dead teen girls amongst many other ignorant things to a member of the LGBT community being outted by someone?
Post Tue Oct 16, 2012 12:26 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Tue Sep 30, 2014 4:05 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon