Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Is it time for AB ED to moderate this site?
12 Answers
Upon seeing this case, it got me thinking that i've seen comments far more threatening on this site. Will this judgement have an effect on how The Answerbank run this place?
If they continue to let threatening behaviour exist and do nothing about it, surely they become culpable.
Do those ABers with better knowledge of the law have a comment? Or has a legal precedent been set?
If they continue to let threatening behaviour exist and do nothing about it, surely they become culpable.
Do those ABers with better knowledge of the law have a comment? Or has a legal precedent been set?
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dabees. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Very interesting dabees! Wonder if that person's the very same who spouts off with vile rants on here???
You want to save the link and post it on here, next time something of that nature occurs!
Personally, I believe in freedom of speech, but there are times when it's definitely not acceptable - i.e. if it causes great offence or upset to whoever it was directed at. The trouble is, what one person'd find repugnant, another could maybe laugh at - because they know it's not directed at anyone the perpetrator knows personally. In the case you've highlighted, the guy knew the police officer, it seems, so it'd be seen on the lines of slander, and an offence. What do you think?
You want to save the link and post it on here, next time something of that nature occurs!
Personally, I believe in freedom of speech, but there are times when it's definitely not acceptable - i.e. if it causes great offence or upset to whoever it was directed at. The trouble is, what one person'd find repugnant, another could maybe laugh at - because they know it's not directed at anyone the perpetrator knows personally. In the case you've highlighted, the guy knew the police officer, it seems, so it'd be seen on the lines of slander, and an offence. What do you think?
What constitutes knowledge of someone Ice? Does reading and chatting (Via text) on here for many months or years mean you have knowledge of someone? Or does meeting a P.C. for the first time, seeing his name, then finding out he can't be present at your interview because he's having a baby?
I'm with you on freedom of speech, but surely any able minded and responsible adult wouldn't wish harm on others children.
I've had that wished my kids on here, as have many others. The owners of this site have to accept some responsibility for the actions of the users of this site, especially if they never do anything to correct the situation.
I'm with you on freedom of speech, but surely any able minded and responsible adult wouldn't wish harm on others children.
I've had that wished my kids on here, as have many others. The owners of this site have to accept some responsibility for the actions of the users of this site, especially if they never do anything to correct the situation.
I totally agree with you. If someone had information about my family, and posted something sick & disgusting on here, I'd contact the IWF, AB - and maybe the police, but I'd want the poster traced. Then again, some people might shrug and say - well, he or she doesn't really know my family, so let them carry on with their sick rants. I think the guy in question was out of order, because he made his remarks publicly, and about someone's child. Maybe it depends on the context in which things are said. Everyone I know can take a joke, but when someone makes malicious accusations or personal jibes, then it's time to get it stopped.
The AB team don't use "outside" moderators, so obviously they don't have enough of them to scan through all the threads, and as with other sites, certain offensive stuff gets through. If you contact the Ed and make a valid complaint though, stuff IS removed. Sometimes it's too late, but if you close everything down full-stop, that in itself is taking away freedom of speech isn't it? Most folk on here are fine really, and nobody forces anyone to read through stuff that they find disgusting.
As for offensive texts or emails, I think you can do something about that, especially if the messages are threatening, or classed as harrassing.
As for offensive texts or emails, I think you can do something about that, especially if the messages are threatening, or classed as harrassing.
I don't see how the site owners can take responsibility for the posts. For that to happen they would have to read every post before it appears on screen.
The responsibility lies solely with the poster.
The case you highlight identifies a real person by name by somebody who has met that person.
If somebody here threatens harm to 'Ethel' I can't take it as a threat as nobody knows who I am so it would be impossible to harm me.
So unless a person is foolish enough to make their identity known then it can be impossible for anybody to threaten them. In legal terms, if somebody says to me (to my face) 'If you were a man I'd knock your teeth out' - that is not threatening behaviour as it is clear I am not a man.
I find it impossible to feel threatened on a public forum by people unknown to me, and who don't know me. It is just words on the screen.
The responsibility lies solely with the poster.
The case you highlight identifies a real person by name by somebody who has met that person.
If somebody here threatens harm to 'Ethel' I can't take it as a threat as nobody knows who I am so it would be impossible to harm me.
So unless a person is foolish enough to make their identity known then it can be impossible for anybody to threaten them. In legal terms, if somebody says to me (to my face) 'If you were a man I'd knock your teeth out' - that is not threatening behaviour as it is clear I am not a man.
I find it impossible to feel threatened on a public forum by people unknown to me, and who don't know me. It is just words on the screen.
Dabees, no legal precedent has been set. Prosecutions under the Telecommunications Act and Communciations Act happen all the time. It seems to be a big fallacy that you can say what you like on the internet without fear of reproach. That is not so, it is just more difficult to deal with because of the anonymity aspect.
Some of what I see on here would easily fall under the definitions in those acts and in fact exceed them. I am appalled that some of the things that are said are allowed to remain. I do not think the Ed and her team could be culpable though because of the disclaimers everywhere and the Site Rules. However, if a particular comment was brought to their attention and then left, I wonder if that might form a case for assisting an offender.
I have personal (not professional) experience of this. On another site in response to a very innocuous message I sent, I received an extremely menacing response, which made me feel awful. I reported it to the police. The website owners (eventually) gave them the poster's details and he was traced. The case is now taking its normal course.
Some of what I see on here would easily fall under the definitions in those acts and in fact exceed them. I am appalled that some of the things that are said are allowed to remain. I do not think the Ed and her team could be culpable though because of the disclaimers everywhere and the Site Rules. However, if a particular comment was brought to their attention and then left, I wonder if that might form a case for assisting an offender.
I have personal (not professional) experience of this. On another site in response to a very innocuous message I sent, I received an extremely menacing response, which made me feel awful. I reported it to the police. The website owners (eventually) gave them the poster's details and he was traced. The case is now taking its normal course.
Some people have choosen to make their identity known and I haven't noticed that they are foolish or at least not for that reason ;-) The internet isn't a pretend world, it's part of the real world. Having said that, yes it is difficult to uphold the law in the cyber part of the real world but what really depresses me is when good people don't react even in their personal interactions with who-ever-said-it but just carry on being chummy as if nothing had happened. The laws of a democratic country reflect our gut feelings about what's okay and what isn't. It's a sad day indeed when we stop reacting just because we know how hard it is to do something about it. I don't know you or your "case" or your offender dabees but wishing harm on somebody's children is never ever under any circumstances okay.
1 to 12 of 12
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.