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

221–230 of 256 posts

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

#221

Post by dragonwriter »

mcguire wrote: post #189
Gupie wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They would be wrong then. The great majority of unionist are of Scottish descent and have been in Norther Ireland from the 1600s. FYI the term "unionist" refers to those in NI who want the union with Britain to be maintained, not as someone looking in from outside would assume those who want a union with Southern Ireland. Those are "nationalists".

"Great majority"? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Northern_Ireland#V... . " ...have been in Norther Ireland from the 1600s. " Not that it matters to anyone, but the Plantation of Ulster would likely be considered a war crime under article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention.

> Not that it matters to anyone, but the Plantation of Ulster would likely be considered a war crime under article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention.

Well, probably not, given that none of the states who were, or whose territory was, involved were parties to Geneva Convention (IV) of 1949 at the time.

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

#222

Post by dragonwriter »

woah wrote: post #118
iso1210 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WTF are you on about "occupying nation"

England is occupying part of Ireland. I have no personal opinion about this, or links to Ireland, but it seems pretty obvious to anyone looking at it from the outside.

> England is occupying part of Ireland.

England is clearly not, since Northern Ireland is a separate country in the UK, not a colony run by the government of England.

After ~400 years its hard to say the UK, is, either, unless you want to say most of the Earth is occupied, often occupied territory of countries that no longer even have a notional government, and often occupied by people who are detached from the government that initiated the occupation (which may itself have ceased to exist.)

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

#223

Post by pessimizer »

bof_ wrote: post #173
iso1631 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Volunteer_Force

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudy_bombing

Is this evidence that the UVA is/was not a paramilitary, or just you declaring your support for them?

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

#224

Post by pessimizer »

dragonwriter wrote: post #222
woah wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

England is occupying part of Ireland. I have no personal opinion about this, or links to Ireland, but it seems pretty obvious to anyone looking at it from the outside.

> England is occupying part of Ireland. England is clearly not, since Northern Ireland is a separate country in the UK, not a colony run by the government of England. After ~400 years its hard to say the UK, is, either, unless you want to say most of the Earth is occupied, often occupied territory of countries that no longer even have a notional government, and often occupied by people who are detached from the gover…

Ireland doesn't exist?

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

#225

Post by pessimizer »

michaelt wrote: post #219
vl wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Essentially it's a piece curved out of a country where descendants of occupants exceed in number native population. Of course it's occupied for so long that now it's "their own", still doesn't change the fact that it was occupied and not treated equally historically in the first place.

But enough about the United States, we're supposed to be discussing Northern Ireland.

It's horrifying when people justify occupations by citing a slave state that annihilated its native population, which still lives in poverty.

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

#226

Post by Dylan16807 »

mcguire wrote: post #189
Gupie wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They would be wrong then. The great majority of unionist are of Scottish descent and have been in Norther Ireland from the 1600s. FYI the term "unionist" refers to those in NI who want the union with Britain to be maintained, not as someone looking in from outside would assume those who want a union with Southern Ireland. Those are "nationalists".

"Great majority"? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Northern_Ireland#V... . " ...have been in Norther Ireland from the 1600s. " Not that it matters to anyone, but the Plantation of Ulster would likely be considered a war crime under article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention.

They made a claim about the majority OF unionists, not that unionists are a majority of anything.

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

#227

Post by tomjakubowski »

dragonwriter wrote: post #222
woah wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

England is occupying part of Ireland. I have no personal opinion about this, or links to Ireland, but it seems pretty obvious to anyone looking at it from the outside.

> England is occupying part of Ireland. England is clearly not, since Northern Ireland is a separate country in the UK, not a colony run by the government of England. After ~400 years its hard to say the UK, is, either, unless you want to say most of the Earth is occupied, often occupied territory of countries that no longer even have a notional government, and often occupied by people who are detached from the gover…

England is the only country of the United Kingdom lacking its own devolved legislature, which speaks to the perspective that England, if not synonymous with the UK, is the principal power within it.

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

#228

Post by meepmorp »

iso1631 wrote: post #167
vl wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol, "Para military" on one side being actual British Army?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Volunteer_Force

Did you intend your post to be an endorsement of NI paramilitaries? I didn't read it like that, but everyone else seems to be doing a round of IRA whataboutism in response.

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

#229

Post by crazydoggers »

saalweachter wrote: post #82
crazydoggers wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You hit the nail on the head! And I’m from the US, so it’s not too Scandinavian. :) What I found interesting was the spectacle of Mark Zuckerberg in front of congress. And yet no action whatsoever has come from it. I think part of the issue is that the very people who could push for legislation (the voters) are also the unwitting products of these companies (sold to their real customers the advertisers). So the manip…

It's difficult to ban a drug enjoyed by the majority of the population, no matter how harmful it is to individuals or society.

This is an excellent point. We know that social media addiction is real, and has real life consequences like increased anxiety and depression. Perhaps we need to start looking at it like a public health emergency.

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

#230

Post by coldtea »

AlexandrB wrote: post #7
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.

Defamation is a great way for those with money to silence dissent and avoid any consequences. Say our product sucks? Defamation. Claim you were sexually assaulted? Defamation. Even if what you said is true, would you be willing to spend the money to go to court and try to fight a defamation lawsuit?

>Even if what you said is true, would you be willing to spend the money to go to court and try to fight a defamation lawsuit?

Court and lawyer support should be free or cheap.

Else you have a bigger problem than "defamation is a great way for those with money to silence dissent and avoid any consequences": all kinds of lawsuits being "a great way for those with money to silence dissent and avoid any consequences".

In an ideal society, a huge corporation and an average Joe should have the same legal representation, quality wise. Of course this means destroying our present norms of elite law firms and bad free counselling assigned by court. Have lawyers on pool as a state service and assign them randomly to cases on either side.

Post reply on HN