Skip to comments.Troll Hunting: a Look at the Dark Side of the Internet
Posted on 09/17/2011 11:23:07 PM PDT by nickcarraway
The word troll no longer conjures up a dumpy little plastic figure with brightly coloured hair: nor a monster from The Lord of the Rings. If you live even a part of your life online, youll know that trolls today are better known as the angry and usually anonymous commenters on web forums, whose aim is to shock, offend, annoy or upset fellow users.
Trolling made headlines this week when Sean Duffy, a young man from Reading, was given 18 weeks imprisonment for defacing Facebook tributes to four dead teenagers whom he had never met. The abuse was vile: on a tribute page to Natasha MacBryde, who had committed suicide, he added: Natasha wasnt bullied, she was just a whore. About Lauren Drew, who died after an epileptic fit, he wrote: I cant get out of my coffin, I have scratched my nails to the bone. And Help me Mummy, its hot in Hell. Duffy led a miserable existence and, according to his lawyer, suffers from Aspergers syndrome, a form of autism that can make it hard to empathise with others. But his behaviour while extreme is similar to that of certain commenters on sites across the internet. Another notorious case, in 2008, saw a young American girl, Megan Meier, driven to suicide, it was claimed, by bullying on the social site MySpace.
India Knight, the novelist and columnist, wrote some years ago of the abuse meted out to Gerry and Kate McCann, the parents of Madeleine, who, as a three-year-old, went missing in Portugal in 2007.
If you havent read what is on the internet about the McCanns, you wouldnt believe it, she writes. Trawling through the sites to find these quotes is like a trip through the darkest recesses of peoples most ungenerous minds.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
It’s also huge in online gaming.
But be aware: trolling takes skill. You need to rope them in, enrage them, and make them waste a lot of time chasing their tail before another troll comes along to steal the focus.
It is hardly safe to post anymore.
Last week I was defending Sarah Palin when I called Jane Pauley “crazy” and I got a a threatening FReepmail against my baby (her picture is on my About Me Page) from an angry guy: “And I am posting the pic of that baby all over the internet.”
I hope this guy was in England and no American was given 18 weeks in jail for exercising free speech. Rotten speech, yes, but well within his rights to say it, at least in this country. If he is in England it seems strange that he got the same sentence they giver out for murder.
People have a right to free speech ok, but you can't use that to trump everything all the time. Don't other people have a right to privacy? A right to grieve? A right to live peaceably? A right to defend themselves?
This is out of the scope of "free speech". Can someone stand up in a court of law and scream at the judge to shut up and call them names and be protected by "freedom of speech"? No he is not at all within his rights, he was maliciously taunting and slandering individuals.
"Freedom of speech" is for protecting the expressing of unpopular views. It does not protect all kinds of behavior where some kind of expression is involved.
Perhaps I can divert the sicko - Jane Pauley is a crazy ditz...
My wife and I are positioned to defend ourselves and remain situationally aware...not to mention that between retired and active cops for neighbors, my community also hosts a variety of avid hunters, just plain gun "nuts", and even a few with survivalist tendencies - the neighborhood is a mine field for anyone skulking around with evil intents.
“was given 18 weeks imprisonment for defacing Facebook tributes”
This is actually a law on the books??????
Intentional infliction of emotional distress. Or whatever specific phrasing they use for laws against real-life stalking.
Duffy pleaded guilty to two counts of sending a communication of an indecent or offensive nature.In this case, UK criminal law was applied. See Communications Offences: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service.
Intentional infliction of emotional distress is a civil law claim (money damages). This was not a civil case. Civil cases can't (directly) result in jail or prison time.
LoL! Thanks for that. :)
My daughter has grown quite a bit since those pictures. I told him I have already posted her pictures many times because she is a real cutie pie.
Those were just suggestions.
Not if you are publicly allowing anyone in the world to write things on your “grieving” wall. The type of grieving that most of us do is within a family or community. We have memorial services and graves in cemeteries.
Nowadays people post their innermost feelings on thecaltar ogvthe Internet and build roadside shrines to “victims” because they have no church, religion, or true community.
I personally think invading their space is no the proper ethical thing to do. However, if you open the front door to your home for the entire world to enter, you will get flies in your kitchen.
Understood. No offense meant. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that you would be interested in reading which laws were involved in the case.
No, I was interested. I wanted to make it clear that I wasn’t claiming to know, merely proposing possibilities.
I could have read the article, of course.
This is not out of the scope of free speech. Writing something on the internet is not going to start a panic. He didn’t yell the equivalent of fire. All he did was insult the he** out of people. They may have a slander case against him if they decided to sue him but jail time is over the top. The whole idea of free speech is that the person saying the speech is allowed to say things that may be difficult for others to hear and not suffer any retribution for it.
Also, going to a funeral and blocking and yelling is not the same thing as typing something on the internet. You, and one other guy on this thread, think someone should go to jail simply because they said something disgusting, that isn't the way this country works, or shouldn't be at any rate.
I was right any way, this happened in GB and not the US. We haven't sunk so low that people's opinions of what someone else said can land you in jail, unless of course you say it about Bozo.
Tell me the difference between Obama not liking what people say about him and wanting to jail people and what you advocate?
Woah...hold on. I did not advocate anything. I certainly didnt advocate sending people to jail because they say something disgusting. I just said that you cannot let the right to free speech be an absolute trump over every other right (because otherwise it becomes a kind of tyranny itself).
That’s true...they did invite comments.
I find your assertions particularly ironic, as my main statement on this (comment #9) has been removed by the moderators! Yeah, you can say whatever the he$$ you like ok...