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

Life after an internet mob attack

pasquale.cool

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 480 posts

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#231

Post by zozbot234 »

newacct583 wrote: post #227
exporectomy wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't judge people on what your emotions tell you is most likely what that type of person usually has a reputation for doing according to the selectively reported news. That's how racism works, or in your case, it's sexism.

Right, which is why you refuse to believe the accusers, right? All we have here is judgement. There's no meaningful evidence except testimony from the people in conflict. You made one call, grandparent made another. Why should only one be sexist?

What has been stated so far is not 'judgment'. SavantIdiot has merely stated a prior that applies to any and all accusations of some sort, regardless of the evidence. The fact that OP can provide evidence of unambiguously positive exchanges, while not dispositive as has been pointed out, is at least enough on its own to overcome the prior.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#232

Post by not2b »

dragonwriter wrote: post #208
WDCDev wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was stunned at how someone with zero evidence and an obvious axe to grind could rally such disdain for someone else with little more than a few unsubstantiated social media posts. I feel that this is due to the weird place victimization occupies in our culture combined with how anti-social social media is. It's extremely easy to issue accusations and threats and have them be read by literally millions of people.…

> At some point we to start thinking about strengthening our libel laws to act as a deterrent to this type of online behaviors. I am unconvinced that there is anything that could be done to strengthen libel laws that would have this effect short of also shutting down essential freedom of expression, given that Western regimes with stronger libel laws are not free of it, and our libel laws tend to go pretty much right…

Might want to talk to folks in Singapore, where the government infamously uses strict libel laws to bankrupt and jail its critics.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#233

Post by azinman2 »

I have no idea if this guy did or didn’t do these things. It’s also not my problem, so it’s not really for me to know. But his argument is one I think a lot about… how we’ve gotten to knee jerk reactions to everything with immense consequence for people’s lives via arguments that wouldn’t past muster in a real court, but become verdicts in public court. Mob rule and violence is one of the worst instincts in humanity, and is exactly why we have real courts with real laws and real processes.

I know this presents difficulties for women, minorities, etc in many situations in which they’ve been wronged, but the solution isn’t more mob justice via Twitter. It’s to find ways to shift culture and laws to bring justice thru effective and measured means.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#234

Post by throwkeep »

mc32 wrote: post #187
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #29

From the linked Notion "Receipts" page: > I've struggled to understand why so many people have piled on to these absurd accusations without facts. I watched a similar situation play out in real time. A friend had to fire an employee who wasn't submitting work or even responding to communications. The employe retaliated by using their moderately large social media presence to disparage my friend and her company. Stran…

The unfortunate tendency of people not in the know is to pile on righteous indignation for the sake of peer brownie points. It’s often clear they’re just taking a birdshit on something that looks like it can earn them internet kudos. Dynamically it doesn’t seem far removed from a lynchmob.

There's a similar tendency I've noticed with these, where people who have met or interacted with the person pile on with vague statements. This is a popular one: "I met him once and knew something was off! He had a creepy vibe".

I'm sure it reflects their interaction in some cases, but it's so common with these witch hunts (including the one in question here), there may be more to it. Motivated reasoning or something?

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#235

Post by SavantIdiot »

newacct583 wrote: post #225
SavantIdiot wrote: post #163

I wouldn't call OP's post "receipts", but rather "his curated receipts." What makes more sense? Some dude has been creepy and only showed the positive side in his defense, or three random unrelated women -- who he claims only ever had lovely, adoring exchanges with him -- decided to destroy his life for no apparent reason. I mean, the former case has a precedent for happening almost habitually in the past, you'd have…

Exactly. Like it or not, accusers have the right to make accusations. Obviously all the predominantly straight, anti-woke men here are going to sympathize with the guy and other people won't. But at the end of the day, what's the solution demanded here? You shouldn't be able to call someone out for being an asshole? What about the people whose accusations are true?

Just like any false accusation: it has to go to court.

The truth is life is a fuckmess right now and there is no instantaneous black/white gratification. And if your success is predicated on a large social-media following, I'm afraid there's nothing you can do when it turns on you. At this point at least.

Not to digress, but holy hell: I mean look at the fuckmess social media has created, of disinformation and conspiracy theories. Flat earth? Pizzagate? Q? For real?

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#236

Post by caddemon »

abnry wrote: post #222
zxzax wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear, is it "cancel culture" or "consequence culture" when the legal system puts people in jail, or practices capital punishment? Or are those considered something different entirely? If so, why?

The idea of a justice system in a democracy is (a) the laws are agreed upon through the political process and (b) due process and impartial consideration are applied in casting a judgment. "Cancel culture" is primarily enforcing things that (a) have not reached the same political consensus as codified law, like laws against theft or murder, and (b) are enforced by impulse, hearsay, and mob mentality.

Yeah the thing that concerns me most about "cancel culture" (of what I see) is people openly pushing back on the principle of innocent until proven guilty. It seems to be common to argue that there is nothing wrong with the court of public opinion putting the burden of proof on the accused. Usually this is combined with some comment about how horrible the accusation is versus how supposedly mild it is to be criticized across the internet.

It's human nature to spread rumors and make snap judgements, so I'm not sure how much this can be stopped. But it scares me to see people straight up trying to morally justify it.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#237

Post by tootie »

exporectomy wrote: post #214
tootie wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They cause harm when they're wrong. Not when they're right. A mob went after Harvey Weinstein because after the first few accusations they rest realized they weren't alone.

Same is true of lynch mobs in real life. Sometimes they do kill actual baddies. It's the tendency to be wrong that makes vigilante justice a problem.

Maybe take a minute to think about this comment one more time.

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#238

Post by batch12 »

throwkeep wrote: post #234
mc32 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unfortunate tendency of people not in the know is to pile on righteous indignation for the sake of peer brownie points. It’s often clear they’re just taking a birdshit on something that looks like it can earn them internet kudos. Dynamically it doesn’t seem far removed from a lynchmob.

There's a similar tendency I've noticed with these, where people who have met or interacted with the person pile on with vague statements. This is a popular one: "I met him once and knew something was off! He had a creepy vibe". I'm sure it reflects their interaction in some cases, but it's so common with these witch hunts (including the one in question here), there may be more to it. Motivated reasoning or something…

People want those sweet, sweet internet points and will lie and whore themselves to the mob to get them. How else does one know their true worth?

Re: Life after an internet mob attack

#239

Post by alex_young »

randompwd wrote: post #201
alex_young wrote: post #171

I don’t have any strong opinions about this ordeal, but the linked ‘receipts’ seemed a bit one-sided to me. Here’s one of the tweets he mentions without a link: https://twitter.com/boop/status/1332815338820472833?s=21 @boob also calls to light this write up seemingly with more context: https://savingjournalism.substack.com/p/vcbrags-pasquale-mit...

Linked receipts seem to be exactly that - receipts. I don't see what the confusion is.

Why post images of tweets rather than link to the source? Seems like cherry-picking out parts of a conversation to me.
Post reply on HN