171–180 of 187 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good on you. What your member did was beyond vile. I have a young daughter, and I'm appalled there are people out there who would event think these things!
Yes, please, let's start policing thoughts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I probably overstate that point, but it is less likely you can see they are on the phone. My point still stands - it's not the responsibility of the driver to peer into the car next to them to see their behaviour. In fact, that's downright dangerous.
I completely disagree, it's downright dangerous to not evaluate the behavior of other drivers around you. If I see someone aggressively changing lanes or tailgating, talking on their cell phone, or doing anything that looks risky to me, I mentally note it and keep as far away from them as possible. I'm frankly amazed anyone wouldn't do the same. I agree that Alice in my example doesn't have any legal fault for the ac…
I'm assuming you see it happening as you drive past. But do you look into each car intently to see what the driver is doing? I see drivers on phones, but I'm sure I don't see all of them. I'm normally aching the traffic and the way they are braking/swerving to determine if the driver is someone to keep clear of.
There is no cultural difference on this one that I'm aware of. In Australia you must be aware of what is going on around you on the road. But you asked about victim blaming - I think someone above expressed it better than me, and you thanked them for their post. That's the one I'm going with :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really easy? ...Really? Edit: Not only would this alter a core and fundamental aspect of how Twitter currently operates but it would certainly be non-trivial to implement in an unobtrusive manner. Who wants what blocked? Is there a generic 'spam/abuse' filter? Is it on by default? Are those tweets put into a spam/abuse section or entirely unviewable. What happens when someone sends a tweet that is blocked by the filt…
Federated twitter blocking where people can choose to outsource the blocking to people they trust would be pretty cool. Kind of like AdBlockPlus lists.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think the register is justifiable at all, to be honest. We don't have it where I live (Australia) and we don't have higher levels of sexual assault than the U.S. (our rates are still too high). If that was the point you were making, I apologise as I misunderstood you.
I wasn't making that point in this specific post, but I agree. It's a 'tough on crime' measure that doesn't actually help things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's your point? It's not a reliable source that Zoe Quinn called in a Swot team against someone falsely!
No, I didn't mention that link, which btw isn't from reddit but from someones blog. (I haven't made up my mind on that one but it seems he makes a leap yes.) I'm trying to point out that you are acting as if you have already made up you mind: whatever the facts, gg-ers are wrong. In this case it seems you are, among other things, denying that KiA is Subreddit-of-the-day. Which is very easy to prove. I suggest you rea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? He's providing the link to reddit to prove that Zoe Quinn called in a Swot team. The source is reliable for matters on Reddit, but that's not what we are discussing.
NO! Now you start reading before making assumptions! SERIOUSLY: The reddit link is about KiA being subreddit-of-the-day. The other link is about the Swot[sic] team, and it is NOT on reddit. Now you wait until you are sober and/or ready to read before you comment : )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's your point? It's not a reliable source that Zoe Quinn called in a Swot team against someone falsely!
No, I didn't mention that link, which btw isn't from reddit but from someones blog. (I haven't made up my mind on that one but it seems he makes a leap yes.) I'm trying to point out that you are acting as if you have already made up you mind: whatever the facts, gg-ers are wrong. In this case it seems you are, among other things, denying that KiA is Subreddit-of-the-day. Which is very easy to prove. I suggest you rea…
Please though, stop making personal attacks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? He's providing the link to reddit to prove that Zoe Quinn called in a Swot team. The source is reliable for matters on Reddit, but that's not what we are discussing.
NO! Now you start reading before making assumptions! SERIOUSLY: The reddit link is about KiA being subreddit-of-the-day. The other link is about the Swot[sic] team, and it is NOT on reddit. Now you wait until you are sober and/or ready to read before you comment : )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite the opposite, Zoe Quinn herself has been discovered to have played a role in SWATing her critics [1]. Incidentally, KotakuInAction has been featured elsewhere today [2]. I agree with your last sentence. [1] http://www.crimeandfederalism.com/2015/01/gamergate-swatting... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/subredditoftheday/comments/2yb80x/m...
“Quite the opposite” ignores that people involved with GamerGate have actually SWATed people (see e.g. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/13/gamergate-... ) and has engaged in all of the other activities I listed. Even if true, a single incident doesn't magically cancel out half a year of real harassment no matter how many times GamerGaters have tried use that logic to avoid addressing bad behaviour by th…
The Guardian article is probably right in naming baphomet (on 8chan), but then follows it up with some very shady language to link it with KiA. I have visited baphomet a few times, and they seem to be doing their own thing, whatever that may be.
As far as I know, Reddit has very strict policies in place to discourage doxxing (except on r/doxme). KotakuInAction, the one you called gamergate's organizing site, cannot be involved in doxxing. Though I'm not a regular reader, I visit it every few weeks to see what they're up to. Not only have I not seen any doxxing there, I have seen threads discouraging such behavior. Also see their Rule #2: "This is the quickest way to a ban, not just from us, but the Reddit admins. Seriously, don’t do it. Take every effort to ensure that your posts do not include any personal information, especially in screenshots."
An interesting side effect of the vicious retaliation against words on the internet (resulting in losing jobs and similar) is that it effectively creates a caste system. On the one hand, you have people like me who can discard their identity and any links to it and say absolutely anything without fear of repercussion. On the other, you have people who are still linked to real-life identities being forced to censor ev…
''On the other, you have people who are still linked to real-life identities bring forced to censor everything they say out of fear'' This is no different to real life.