PDA

View Full Version : Mind your manners



Glom
2011-Sep-14, 09:02 PM
Someone has now been jailed for Internet trolling. This person apparently left mean spirited messages on a Facebook tribute to a deceased relative among other things.

The Daily Mash (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/science-%26-technology/uh%11oh%2c-says-everyone-on-internet-201109144300/) has the best take on it.

Paul Beardsley
2011-Sep-14, 09:09 PM
"Mean spirited" is a polite way of putting it. I'm pleased to see the message going out: you can no longer hide behind anonymity, you now have to think twice about your actions on the internet or face the consequences.

Van Rijn
2011-Sep-15, 12:03 AM
Someone has now been jailed for Internet trolling. This person apparently left mean spirited messages on a Facebook tribute to a deceased relative among other things.

The Daily Mash (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/science-%26-technology/uh%11oh%2c-says-everyone-on-internet-201109144300/) has the best take on it.

Language warning (one word, but still . . .).

Fazor
2011-Sep-15, 12:16 AM
I'd love to see an end to internet trollery. Won't happen though. I'm certainly no psychologist, but any time there's some sort of barrier between people, they tend to act more aggressively/rudely than they do in person. I notice it on the phone, but that's intimate enough that most people still retain some form of civility (assuming they have any to begin with.) You see it even more when people are in cars; which act as a cocoon between them and the other drivers.

The internet is just the ultimate insulator, where you're interacting with text and a computer screen, with no indication of the person(s) on the other end of the line.

I know I'll say more online than I would to someone's face (had a few choice tweets directed at the MLS about 30 min ago. Jim may know what about ;)); but I try not to say anything online that I wouldn't stand behind in person.

Gillianren
2011-Sep-15, 12:17 AM
Personally, I don't have much to delete. If I wouldn't say it in person, I'm not inclined to post it online. And if I were, the friends I have online would have called me on it long ago.

Daffy
2011-Sep-15, 01:07 AM
If we are going to start jailing nitwits, who gets to decide who the nitwits are? Internet trolls are annoying---arresting those trolls is frightening. I am hoping this is a parody, a la The Onion.

Just looked at the other headlines. Must be a joke.

closetgeek
2011-Sep-15, 02:18 AM
If we are going to start jailing nitwits, who gets to decide who the nitwits are? Internet trolls are annoying---arresting those trolls is frightening. I am hoping this is a parody, a la The Onion.

Just looked at the other headlines. Must be a joke.

I get to decide and I'm calling the feds on you, first. Names that end in Y are annoying. Seriously, though, at some point, "I'm just kidding," can no longer obsolve you. I do wonder if jail is the right place for this guy, though. To actively seek out opportunities to cause emotional distress in strangers is an indication that something isn't working right, upstair.

LaurelHS
2011-Sep-15, 03:03 AM
It's not a parody.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-14894576

Gillianren
2011-Sep-15, 03:14 AM
Yeah, I'm not buying the Asperger's defense. I just watched The Human Face, with John Cleese, and there was a guy on there with Asperger's who was hoping someone had put a book out to help him figure out what facial expressions mean. Just because someone has a biological reason for not knowing what you're feeling doesn't mean they have a free pass for not caring, and it's pretty clear that this guy didn't care. Besides, I've got a sneaking suspicion each of those truly appalling posts was followed by quite a lot of people calling him on them, so only the first one would be excused by "I thought it was okay because they would know I was kidding."

HenrikOlsen
2011-Sep-15, 03:26 AM
You see it even more when people are in cars; which act as a cocoon between them and the other drivers.
I think with cars it's also a lot about territoriality, you're moving around in a part of your own territory which is challenged whenever someone gets too close.

The internet is just the ultimate insulator, where you're interacting with text and a computer screen, with no indication of the person(s) on the other end of the line.
Online computer games is probably the ultimate expression of the effect, there are a lot of players who seem utterly unable to comprehend that it's a real person who is on the other end of the interaction which makes them act as if they have one of the antisocial personality disorders. They're normally recognized by the cry of "It's only a game" after they destroyed something someone else just spent hours making.

HenrikOlsen
2011-Sep-15, 03:37 AM
One of my friends has Asperger's, I expect he'd be appalled at the smear that defense puts on him and everyone else who has it.
Being clueless doesn't excuse being mean, and this isn't a case of being mean, this is a case of being actively hurtful.
Making movies and photo shopping pictures using the faces of recently dead teens and posting them on their memorial pages with texts degrading the deceased? That's not trolling, that's malicious harassment.

Gillianren
2011-Sep-15, 05:28 AM
I'm reasonably sure this would be illegal in many jurisdictions if he sent it through the mails, too; being a jerk online should not make you exempt from laws like that.

Perikles
2011-Sep-15, 10:54 AM
One of my friends has Asperger's, I expect he'd be appalled at the smear that defense puts on him and everyone else who has it..I myself am somewhere on the Asperger's spectrum, and am seriously unimpressed with a lawyer who uses it as a defence for this behaviour. The Aspie spectrum encompasses a whole range of character traits, but being that malicious is not one of them.

grapes
2011-Sep-15, 11:12 AM
The Daily Mash (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/science-%26-technology/uh%11oh%2c-says-everyone-on-internet-201109144300/) has the best take on it.And with good reason! As one of the ads for the Daily Mash dating service says: "Looking for that special someone who shares your hateful, ill-informed opinions?"

Heid the Ba'
2011-Sep-15, 11:18 AM
I myself am somewhere on the Asperger's spectrum, and am seriously unimpressed with a lawyer who uses it as a defence for this behaviour. The Aspie spectrum encompasses a whole range of character traits, but being that malicious is not one of them.
A lawyer is the client's agent, he presents the defence as given to him by the client.

Perikles
2011-Sep-15, 11:34 AM
A lawyer is the client's agent, he presents the defence as given to him by the client.I hope that was said tongue-in-cheek. That sounds exactly like a lawyer's response to a criticism in order to deny any responsibility for his, the lawyers, actions.

Daffy
2011-Sep-15, 12:53 PM
I get to decide and I'm calling the feds on you, first. Names that end in Y are annoying. Seriously, though, at some point, "I'm just kidding," can no longer obsolve you. I do wonder if jail is the right place for this guy, though. To actively seek out opportunities to cause emotional distress in strangers is an indication that something isn't working right, upstair.

LOL! Maybe I'll use "Daffie."

Looks like the story probably is true---and this guy certainly is a jerk. I'd be more comfortable with a civil suit against him, though.

NEOWatcher
2011-Sep-15, 01:40 PM
The Daily Mash (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/science-%26-technology/uh%11oh%2c-says-everyone-on-internet-201109144300/) has the best take on it.
I've never liked their take on anything. There's only enough information in thier articles to support their ranting.


If we are going to start jailing nitwits, who gets to decide who the nitwits are?
The same way we do it with "live" situations. There are harassment laws.

Just like Gillian's view. Why should the internet be any different than any other aspect in life?


A lawyer is the client's agent, he presents the defence as given to him by the client.
A lawyer is not given the defense. A lawyer develops the defense and advises the client based on the client's information.
But; yes, it is the lawyers job to do whatever they can to help the client, and sometimes(often?) results in some tasteless results.

Gillianren
2011-Sep-15, 03:56 PM
A lawyer is the client's agent, he presents the defence as given to him by the client.

Not necessarily, at least not if he's a good lawyer.

Buttercup
2011-Sep-15, 04:00 PM
The world would be a nicer place if more people could comprehend and behave upon the "treat others as you'd like to be treated" principle. But unfortunately it seems too many humans have never heard of that concept, don't get it, don't want to understand it, or perhaps are just plain too stupid?

Solfe
2011-Sep-15, 04:27 PM
Am I understanding this correctly? This is one man marauding social media sites to make fun of children who died? He is in definite need of a prison enforced time out from the internet. In fact, they should drop all of his security/privacy settings while he is doing time.

Jim
2011-Sep-15, 04:50 PM
... In fact, they should drop all of his security/privacy settings while he is doing time.

I think that's kinda what happens anyway. At least, in the showers.

closetgeek
2011-Sep-16, 12:54 AM
The world would be a nicer place if more people could comprehend and behave upon the "treat others as you'd like to be treated" principle. But unfortunately it seems too many humans have never heard of that concept, don't get it, don't want to understand it, or perhaps are just plain too stupid?

Self entitled; when their mommies said they were special, they continued to believe it, into adulthood. :)

LaurelHS
2011-Sep-16, 01:40 AM
I myself am somewhere on the Asperger's spectrum, and am seriously unimpressed with a lawyer who uses it as a defence for this behaviour. The Aspie spectrum encompasses a whole range of character traits, but being that malicious is not one of them.
Sean Duffy is not the first to try this defense for reprehensible online behaviour, by the way. William Melchert-Dinkel used the same excuse when he was tried for aiding suicides over the Internet (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1383745/Former-nurse-William-Melchert-Dinkel-hunted-depressed-people-chatrooms-encouraged-suicide-jailed.html).

Perikles
2011-Sep-16, 08:41 AM
William Melchert-Dinkel used the same excuse when he was tried for aiding suicides over the Internet (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1383745/Former-nurse-William-Melchert-Dinkel-hunted-depressed-people-chatrooms-encouraged-suicide-jailed.html).Interesting. Sounds like he had real big problems apart from the Aspergers. Am I imagining it, or does he actually look like the guy which this thread is about?

Glom
2011-Sep-16, 11:31 AM
I've never liked their take on anything. There's only enough information in thier articles to support their ranting.

But what about this article?

NEOWatcher
2011-Sep-16, 12:46 PM
But what about this article?
I think the blanket statement of my opinion applies.

Glom
2011-Sep-16, 02:21 PM
I think the blanket statement of my opinion applies.

Do you prefer the Onion then?

NEOWatcher
2011-Sep-16, 02:31 PM
Do you prefer the Onion then?
It depends on what I'm going for. Is it news or entertainment.
For news, no, absolutely not.
For entertainment, yes. The Onion is a clearly defined parady of current news and I know I can't take anything seriously there. Besides, the language isn't as crude.

Glom
2011-Sep-16, 03:28 PM
It depends on what I'm going for. Is it news or entertainment.
For news, no, absolutely not.
For entertainment, yes. The Onion is a clearly defined parady of current news and I know I can't take anything seriously there. Besides, the language isn't as crude.

Hmm.

You are aware the link is to the Daily Mash not the Daily Mail?

Perikles
2011-Sep-16, 06:11 PM
Hmm.

You are aware the link is to the Daily Mash not the Daily Mail?It is important to note that difference. The Daily Mash has some serious news, but the other is just a joke.

Buttercup
2011-Sep-16, 07:09 PM
It is important to note that difference. The Daily Mash has some serious news, but the other is just a joke.

Uh...don't you have that backwards? :confused:

Perikles
2011-Sep-16, 07:29 PM
Uh...don't you have that backwards? :confused:Oh dear - where is the sarcasm smiley? Only half true - I think the Daily Mail is just a joke, and the Daily Mash a genuine joke. :razz:

NEOWatcher
2011-Sep-16, 07:44 PM
Hmm.
You are aware the link is to the Daily Mash not the Daily Mail?
Yes; I understand the Mash is intended for humor, but they tie it too closely to the story for my comfort.
The Daily Mail is a different story, it attempts to present a story as fact for the shock, but turns out to be humor that I don't laugh at.

Noclevername
2011-Sep-16, 08:44 PM
Criminalizing Aspergers is the new Twinkie defense-- or perhaps the new Chewbacca defense. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense) Either way, it hits me where I live. It's one thing to not know what's appropriate, it's another to go out of your way to deliberately hurt someone.

John Jaksich
2011-Sep-16, 09:01 PM
Illnesses may be the root cause of some behavioral problems--but that IMHO may not excuse it. Personally, I have not behaved as politely as I could or should have---of late. Otherwise, most individuals have the option of delicately navigating the social networks (using a combination of mindfully adhering to common courtesy & knowing when to stay out of trouble). That is just my opinion

Gillianren
2011-Sep-16, 11:14 PM
Actually, I have this thing about "explanation versus excuse." If I tell you that I can't be helpful today because I'm having a depressive episode, that's an explanation. If I tell you that I can get away with [behavioural pattern] any time I do it, that's an excuse. I am still responsible for my actions, even within the framework of my illness. Now, that also includes knowing that, sometimes, I need to back away from situations because my emotional state will not let me behave rationally.

John Jaksich
2011-Sep-17, 12:49 AM
Actually, I have this thing about "explanation versus excuse." If I tell you that I can't be helpful today because I'm having a depressive episode, that's an explanation. If I tell you that I can get away with [behavioural pattern] any time I do it, that's an excuse. I am still responsible for my actions, even within the framework of my illness. Now, that also includes knowing that, sometimes, I need to back away from situations because my emotional state will not let me behave rationally.


That is very well said!:cool:

Noclevername
2011-Sep-17, 07:22 AM
I am still responsible for my actions, even within the framework of my illness. Now, that also includes knowing that, sometimes, I need to back away from situations because my emotional state will not let me behave rationally.

Being only recently diagnosed, I'm still learning how to do that. In fact finding that balance is one of the major things my therapist and I are working on now; trying to work out, as JohnJaksich put it, the "common courtesy & knowing when to stay out of trouble" that non-Aspergers-sufferers seem to figure out instinctively.

Solfe
2011-Sep-17, 08:14 PM
I know a few children who have Aspergers. They tend to be generally well-behaved; any rudeness tends to be of the exuberant "I-am-speaking-right-over-you" or "I-just-can-stop-right-now" type, not name calling. Any time I have seen name calling, there is always a second or third child involved and they are playing up their side. I can't help but make the observation that sometimes children with Aspergers are off-kilter, but not really meaner than any other child. Does Aspergers actual cause "bad" behavior?

HenrikOlsen
2011-Sep-17, 11:10 PM
From my experience, which is only with adults who have Aspergers, they tend to be a bit concerned about accidentally causing offense because they know that they can do so unintentionally. Never met one with a mean streak.

Kadava
2011-Sep-18, 01:31 AM
Mean streak and Asperger's aren't related conditions. You can have none, one or both. As stated by many in the thread, Aspies without a mean streak are likely to be trying harder to avoid offending, and when they do it is not only inadvertant but also hugely embarrassing. (I am an Aspie myself, and can be totally crushed by even a mild rebuke.)

That said, an Aspie with a cruel streak could potentially be worse than your usual bully, due to the tendency to fixate on things. (In this case causing grief and pain to random people.)

HenrikOlsen
2011-Sep-18, 02:09 AM
Main thing to note is that his Asperger's is neither excuse nor explanation for that guy's actions. Using it as defense may work but it's still a Chewbacca defense.

Gillianren
2011-Sep-18, 05:24 AM
It's also worth noting that the Twinkie defense (which is oversimplified in the public imagination) was almost certainly a relatively minor factor in the outcome of the trial. And after all, the guy was found guilty. Just of a lesser offense. It's also worth noting that he claimed consuming too much junk food (not just Twinkies) exacerbated the very condition I myself have. And I'm not buying it. The pattern of behaviour doesn't fit the illness.

HenrikOlsen
2011-Sep-18, 06:05 AM
Wasn't the claim in that trial that the shift from health food to Twinkies was a symptom of his depression, i.e. self-medication to get the sugar rush to temporarily lift the depression or something like that, rather than a cause as the popular depiction apparently has it?
So it was used as evidence for the depression, not as an excuse or explanation.

Gillianren
2011-Sep-18, 04:51 PM
It was a symptom that exacerbated the condition. Because he was just sitting around, eating junk food--he'd never really eaten health food per se, just not as much junk food--he trapped himself in a vicious cycle that ended with sneaking into the San Francisco City Hall and shooting two people.