News1 min ago
What Can Be Done About Twitface?
221 Answers
https:/
I think the Home sec has done the right thing in condemning this awful abuse and supporting Mr Lammy but surely this cesspit needs a rocket up it's April.
I think the Home sec has done the right thing in condemning this awful abuse and supporting Mr Lammy but surely this cesspit needs a rocket up it's April.
Answers
ck1 - // So antisemitism
11:26 Wed 05th Aug 2020
You don't have to be a sad sap to have your life turned upside down by online abuse - careers put in jeopardy,marriages placed on shaky ground etc.
Sheer hatefulness and cruelty hiding behind an anonymous keyboard must be checked.
That still leaves acres of space for robust discussion and daft name calling if that's what you're into.
Sheer hatefulness and cruelty hiding behind an anonymous keyboard must be checked.
That still leaves acres of space for robust discussion and daft name calling if that's what you're into.
// You don't have to be a sad sap to have your life turned upside down by online abuse - careers put in jeopardy, marriages placed on shaky ground etc.//
Only if you are in the Public Eye and decide to frequent these platforms in the first place. Don't go into the water if you cant swim and expect them to drain the pool for you.
Only if you are in the Public Eye and decide to frequent these platforms in the first place. Don't go into the water if you cant swim and expect them to drain the pool for you.
APG - // If you don't like the ambience of a particular platform don't try and change it; put up or go somewhere else. //
It's not about changing anything, it's about observing simple courtesies to each other, which help the world go round.
If people are rude and aggressive, they should be challenged, because failure to do so makes that behaviour acceptable, which then becomes normal, and society slips a bit further down the slippery slope.
I don't want any website tailormade for my sensibilities, but I won't put up with rudeness and abuse either.
It's not about changing anything, it's about observing simple courtesies to each other, which help the world go round.
If people are rude and aggressive, they should be challenged, because failure to do so makes that behaviour acceptable, which then becomes normal, and society slips a bit further down the slippery slope.
I don't want any website tailormade for my sensibilities, but I won't put up with rudeness and abuse either.
APG - // Only if you are in the Public Eye and decide to frequent these platforms in the first place. Don't go into the water if you cant swim and expect them to drain the pool for you. //
Again, it's about basic respect.
I remember interviewing Gary Numan at the height of his pop career, and he told me how random people would come up to him and tell him that his music is crap and he's an idiot (adjectives made milder obviously for the sensibilities I outlined earlier) and as he reasonably pointed out, what gives people the right to behave like that simply because he is famous?
Fame does not make you an Aunt Sally for every jealous no-brain numpty who likes having a go, it's simply not acceptable.
If we accept that 'famous people' are simply fair game, then where do we stop? Make it the norm, and everyone is in line for abuse.
Abuse is not acceptable - not for anyone, whether they are assumed to deserve it, or they are able to take it, it's not acceptable. That's it.
Again, it's about basic respect.
I remember interviewing Gary Numan at the height of his pop career, and he told me how random people would come up to him and tell him that his music is crap and he's an idiot (adjectives made milder obviously for the sensibilities I outlined earlier) and as he reasonably pointed out, what gives people the right to behave like that simply because he is famous?
Fame does not make you an Aunt Sally for every jealous no-brain numpty who likes having a go, it's simply not acceptable.
If we accept that 'famous people' are simply fair game, then where do we stop? Make it the norm, and everyone is in line for abuse.
Abuse is not acceptable - not for anyone, whether they are assumed to deserve it, or they are able to take it, it's not acceptable. That's it.
One further point is that one doesn't even need to intend to be famous to become famous. As a classic example, you might want to read into the story of such accidental stars as Ken Bone, Laina Morris, and many others. As Andy also points out, anybody being famous seems to give people the mentality that they are "fair game". Maybe pop stars just want to make music and not be harassed either in the street or openly. Maybe Ken Bone just wanted to ask a question at a political debate without having his private life delved into and relatively minor demons exposed for all to see. Maybe Laina Morris just wanted to post a humorous video without becoming an internet sensation and without being drawn into a world she wasn't prepared to handle that exacerbated mental health issues. In the UK, maybe Gail Trimble just wanted to answer questions well on a quiz show without being subject to sexist abuse, without being invited (via her brother!) to do a Nuts photoshoot, and without being insulted over all the major papers.
All of these are presumably separated, in APG's view, by virtue of abandoning even for a second their anonymity. But they still expose the nasty world of trolls, and it simply beggars belief that we should tolerate that at the same time as criticising those who don't want to put up with it. Of course, the other irony is that the cloak of anonymity also seems to act, for some, as a useful protection to be so vile in the first place.
I can sympathise to an extent with, say, fears about cancel culture, about being afraid of our own shadows and so on. But there's a very clear position between the two extremes of "anything goes" and "nobody can say anything", where people are merely being asked to give more thought to what they say, why they say it... and to show more empathy.
All of these are presumably separated, in APG's view, by virtue of abandoning even for a second their anonymity. But they still expose the nasty world of trolls, and it simply beggars belief that we should tolerate that at the same time as criticising those who don't want to put up with it. Of course, the other irony is that the cloak of anonymity also seems to act, for some, as a useful protection to be so vile in the first place.
I can sympathise to an extent with, say, fears about cancel culture, about being afraid of our own shadows and so on. But there's a very clear position between the two extremes of "anything goes" and "nobody can say anything", where people are merely being asked to give more thought to what they say, why they say it... and to show more empathy.
jim - I can only agree with the points you have raised.
Being famous for anything does not mean you automatically forfeit the right to a private life.
Remember Koo Stark, who's only sin was to fall for a member of the royal family.
I remember chatting with a friend of hers and being told by Koo about being chased on her motor scooter through the streets of London. Unable to shake off the pap, Koo stopped, and as she was parking her scooter, he parked behind her, came over, and tried to wrench off her crash helmet so he could take her picture.
Now whichever world you live in, that is utterly unacceptable, and as you and I agree, if we start to accept this as the price people pay for being famous, and they simply have to put up with it, then we are in a sorry state indeed as a society.
People deserve respect and privacy, it's the right of all, famous or not.
Being famous for anything does not mean you automatically forfeit the right to a private life.
Remember Koo Stark, who's only sin was to fall for a member of the royal family.
I remember chatting with a friend of hers and being told by Koo about being chased on her motor scooter through the streets of London. Unable to shake off the pap, Koo stopped, and as she was parking her scooter, he parked behind her, came over, and tried to wrench off her crash helmet so he could take her picture.
Now whichever world you live in, that is utterly unacceptable, and as you and I agree, if we start to accept this as the price people pay for being famous, and they simply have to put up with it, then we are in a sorry state indeed as a society.
People deserve respect and privacy, it's the right of all, famous or not.
TTT. You know nothing about Twitter, nothing about David Lammy, who is an anti-white racist, and nothing about Sky ' News'.
Still, you've scored a few brownie points with your fellow know-nothings. Perhaps you think they'll censor you less if you throw them a bone now and again, you may be right.
Please stop calling yourself a Conservative, you don't know what it means.
Still, you've scored a few brownie points with your fellow know-nothings. Perhaps you think they'll censor you less if you throw them a bone now and again, you may be right.
Please stop calling yourself a Conservative, you don't know what it means.
spicerack:"TTT. You know nothing about Twitter, nothing about David Lammy, who is an anti-white racist, and nothing about Sky ' News'.
Still, you've scored a few brownie points with your fellow know-nothings. Perhaps you think they'll censor you less if you throw them a bone now and again, you may be right.
Please stop calling yourself a Conservative, you don't know what it means. " - pay attention, I hate David Lammy and his anti British, socialist, anti white, anti semetic, racist views, I regularly call him MAABOF. However none of that means I think it's ok to use twitface to racially abuse him. I have no need nor desire to "score brownie points" with political opponents - Just because we have opposite views does that mean I must never have any sympathy? That way lies fascism. You should be ashamed of yourself sunshine. You don't know me, you don't know who I am but declare I'm non conservative because of a sample of compassion for the "enemy"? I am the very epitome of a conservative, it's you that needs to learn what that means.
Still, you've scored a few brownie points with your fellow know-nothings. Perhaps you think they'll censor you less if you throw them a bone now and again, you may be right.
Please stop calling yourself a Conservative, you don't know what it means. " - pay attention, I hate David Lammy and his anti British, socialist, anti white, anti semetic, racist views, I regularly call him MAABOF. However none of that means I think it's ok to use twitface to racially abuse him. I have no need nor desire to "score brownie points" with political opponents - Just because we have opposite views does that mean I must never have any sympathy? That way lies fascism. You should be ashamed of yourself sunshine. You don't know me, you don't know who I am but declare I'm non conservative because of a sample of compassion for the "enemy"? I am the very epitome of a conservative, it's you that needs to learn what that means.
I really don’t get the importance that’s attached to these social media sites.
Any number of events reported on the news will be followed by “so and so has tweeted” or “on somebody’s Facebook page they have said”
To which my thoughts are always, “whoopie-do, so what.”
And what stupid names. “Twitter” sounds like such a childish word, and “Face” and “Book” said together sound unnatural to me.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.