It seems easy to forget that we all, each and every one of us, has the Right to Free Speech. You can prove that for yourself: Without committing Assault or applying any other unsolicited Force, get any other person to stop talking.
Even governments canât do it, no matter how despotic. All they can do is punish what they donât like, and that just leads to bloodshed â usually the Despotâs, historically speaking.
Itâs also easy to forget that speech is ALL there is on the Internet. You can prove that too! Iâm calling you an A-hole. Now punch your monitor hard enough to bloody my nose. How did that feel? Didnât bother me a bit.
The trick is understanding that by rejoicing in another personâs exercise of their Free Speech Right, you actually bolster and reinforce your own Free Speech Right by so doing.
Now you just have to understand that there is NO LAW that says you have to LISTEN.
Back to your regularly scheduled ⌠whatever that was.
Freedom of expression comes with responsibilities as well. Trolling could be considered incitement to riot. Besides which, in the context of this forum, itâs not a right but a privilege. Chocolate covered expressly beans are awesomely delicious but unfortunately have an adverse affect on my personality so I canât bean and post. Snickers I can handle.
⌠except on a forum like this. There are forum rules that override free speech. That is perfectly compatible with the First Amendment here in the USA.
Possibly. Although on closer look at the actual wording we are asked to Please avoid such topics, on the basis that they are known to create argument. He does not say it is cause for a ban, such as spamming. Anyone is, of course, free to say what they wish and deal with the consequences. And freedom of speech does not mean there will not be consequences, regardless of what people think. Donât believe me? Tell the truth when a woman asks if those jeans make her butt look big⌠just saying.
Point being, this is sb56637âs house, and his wishes are that we get along in his place. So if you wish to hang out at sb56637âs, you abide by sb56637âs house rules. That is simply the way it is, and if you come to my house you will deal with similar rules. No profanity, no smoking, no obnoxious behavior, no drinking alcohol. sb56637 might ban you for breaking his rules. It might go far worse for breaking house rules in my house⌠So is this Sanction, or is it getting along in public? You are free to say or do what you wish at work, you might not keep your job if you are not wise. You are free to say or do as you wish in any public place, you might have to deal with the Police if you are not wise, it is not really any different here. But our police are not named Norm nor do they run around deleting our posts at will.
Of main concern is that never do a single persons rights over-ride another personâs rights, and decency must prevail as we are in mixed company and there are, more often than not, children present.
Anyone that would riot because they read something from an Internet troll, probably belongs in jail.
Iâm pretty sure that for speech to be considered illegal, it also has to pass a âreasonablenessâ test.
i.e., Just because a nut-case might riot, isnât enough for the speech to be considered illegal. It would have to cause a reasonable person to riot.
For example, shouting âfire!!!â in a crowded theatre might be considered illegal. But shouting, âzombie attack!!!â in a crowded theatre would not, even if a couple of nuts started to panic.
JK, of course. I make an excellent target sometimes. Use me. I sometimes even encourage it, since I can âtake itâ better than most. E.g. I know I have a tendency to really p*ss off âcard-carryingâ authoritarians just by speaking.
The follow-up comments all seem to prove my point, though, since even in the âfire in a crowded theaterâ rule doesnât stop someone from shouting âfireâ, it only threatens them with punishment for doing so. I hate to think of what might happen to someone âtalking to the screenâ encouraging the hero to discharge his/her weapon⌠(If anybody is interested, that also proves the fatal, fundamental flaw in the concept of Democracy (talking about Social Structure, not Politics) â even if everybody in the theater agrees that it is appropriate to stomp their neighbors into the rotting jujubes on the floor & pack the nearest exit in blind panic, doesnât make any of them right.)
Not that Iâm trying to prove anything to this lot, but maybe now SB56637âs âOne-Button Solutionâ will make more sense⌠(And why only you can see your own Rudeness Meter!)
(EDIT: well, I canât actually see my own Rudeness Meter, but maybe thatâs because Iâm such a sweet, thoroughly-loved guy. ROTFLOLPIMP!! Yeah, right.)
And Iâll go back to lurking again with one reminder: I thought the title of this thread used to mention not feeding the trolls. From the old dial-up BBS days, through ânewsgroupsâ until this moment, that still seems to be the fastest, most effective way of getting the troll to leave on his own. (BTW, are there female trolls? IDK & donât really care, it just seems rare.) You canât blame a dog for being a dog, but that doesnât mean you have to feed it.
Just the phrase âcard carrying authoritariansâ lumps any who disagree with you into a group with a negative association. This, while it may be funny to you, is both an insult and a tactical block against disagreement. Itâs common and has no basis in debate. Dunk tank for you my friend.