Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 256 posts

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#71

Post by krapp »

dangerface wrote: post #27
echelon wrote: post #2

I'm a fan of free speech, but defamation is one of the limits I agree with. The UK has a stricter framework than the US, but I think these cases should happen in the US too. It's good to see precedent being established for prosecuting those that abuse social media for evil. I'm interested in who the guilty party is in this case. They can afford a six figure penalty and want to remain anonymous.

Absolutely free speech doesn't mean you are free to use your speech to attack people and spread lies.

>Absolutely free speech doesn't mean you are free to use your speech to attack people and spread lies.

Yes it does, that's exactly what it means.

People disagree on what "free speech" means, on what limits can legitimately be placed on that freedom and by whom, but the implications of "absolutely free" speech are unambiguous.

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#72

Post by xdennis »

Why is there no mention of what he actually said? There's a big difference between calling someone a poopyhead and alleging he's a pedophile.

How can the people stay informed about potential abuse when the press omits the most important part?

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#73

Post by [deleted] »

moksly wrote: post #37

> The individual admitted running a campaign which "involved the systematic dissemination of false and defamatory allegations" against Mr Nolan. I think that it is good that someone got to own up for the turdslinging they do online, but why are we ok with platforms that aren’t held accountable for the “systematic dissemination of false and defamatory allegations” they enable? What if you don’t have BBC lawyers and re…

[deleted]

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#74

Post by krapp »

iNane9000 wrote: post #69

The word “troll” has lost all meaning. It’s worse than “hacker”. I now reflexively disregard the people who use the term. I’m sure they’d say that anyone who disagrees must be “trolling” too. A bad word that impedes thinking.

cool story bro.

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#75

Post by treeman79 »

moksly wrote: post #37

> The individual admitted running a campaign which "involved the systematic dissemination of false and defamatory allegations" against Mr Nolan. I think that it is good that someone got to own up for the turdslinging they do online, but why are we ok with platforms that aren’t held accountable for the “systematic dissemination of false and defamatory allegations” they enable? What if you don’t have BBC lawyers and re…

He was banned in order for Joe Biden to win. Plain and simple.

Same as why Hunter Biden stories were being blocked on Facebook as untrue, even though they were true. It made one candidate look bad.

It’s important to remember there is a narrative that stories must fit.

The next Republican candidate will be declared mean, dumb, all-phobic to everyone. Everything they say will be “fact checked” and proven false.

Doesn’t matter who it is. Doesn’t matter what they say, or their actual position. They will be canceled.

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#76

Post by TYPE_FASTER »

londons_explore wrote: post #20

Not many people have 6 figures lying around to pay... I think most regular people, faced with the offer of a 6 figure settlement, would probably fight it to the bitter end in court, before claiming bankruptcy. I wonder if this might have been someone famous for whom 6 figures is expensive but not worth the PR damage?

Or the people/organizations funding the troll agreed to pay the settlement

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#77

Post by cwkoss »

throw_m239339 wrote: post #58
cwkoss wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are also several (known) political mercenaries who operate bot farms specifically to attack leftists and signal boost those attacks to astroturf popularity.

> There are also several (known) political mercenaries who operate bot farms specifically to attack leftists and signal boost those attacks to astroturf popularity. You mean harassers and bullies from hexbear AKA chapotraphouse who target radical feminists? Yes, it's leftists attacking women who disagree with them.

I was primarily referring to Sally Albright (the example with the most publicly available evidence). She is a political mercenary who was outed as operating a large bot farm using identities of people who died. Funded by ShareBlue to attack people critical of HRC, then Biden.

Arguably, she created the "donut twitter" faction - which grew past the bot accounts she controlled.

Though I'm sure this tactic is used by every political leaning to some extent. I think her example is particularly egregious because she is being funded by the DNC apparatus - not just a lone wolf.

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#78

Post by wccrawford »

GavinMcG wrote: post #52
barbegal wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most damages are settled out of court. Going to court is more expensive so lawyers on both sides try to avoid this.

Damages is a legal term of art that implies a finding of fault in a judicial proceeding and a corresponding award by the court/arbitrator/etc. This is not that: no fault/guilt need be admitted (though it was here). It's just a contract to accept a certain amount of money and in exchange to not proceed with a lawsuit.

It's also an English word that can be used for the same kind of thing without the law being involved at all.

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#79

Post by chrisseaton »

barbegal wrote: post #41
NoboruWataya wrote: post #28

It seems misleading for the headline to talk about "damages" when the case settled. "Damages" to me suggests court-ordered compensation.

Most damages are settled out of court. Going to court is more expensive so lawyers on both sides try to avoid this.

There are no damages... because they settled.

Re: Twitter 'troll' to pay six-figure sum

#80

Post by chrisseaton »

bpodgursky wrote: post #38
londons_explore wrote: post #20

Not many people have 6 figures lying around to pay... I think most regular people, faced with the offer of a 6 figure settlement, would probably fight it to the bitter end in court, before claiming bankruptcy. I wonder if this might have been someone famous for whom 6 figures is expensive but not worth the PR damage?

I think a _ton_ of people would come up with 6 figures if the alternative was jail time. It doesn't have to be cash in the bank -- take out debt, remortgage your house, sell your car, borrow from friends and family, etc.

> alternative was jail time

Who's going to jail in this situation? It's not criminal and we don't have debtors' jails here in the UK.

Post reply on HN