What happened to OC? - CLOSED Carnage?!
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
DiSiAC

Video Game Reviewer Is Contacting the Mothers of Her Online Harassers

25 posts in this topic

This is awesome. Anyone saying "well don't use the internet then" can go fuck themselves liberally. The internet has provided a platform for anyone to be an edgy prick with no consequences, and likewise there's an equal footing for retaliation. People on the internet get retaliated against and fucked with on a regular basis for way more stupid shit than this, so when someone gets an actual consequence for threatening to rape someone, it's fucking beautiful. Quit pretending like the reviewer is somehow in the wrong for "tattling to someone's mommy" as if they're being a hardass shrewd. Fuck that childish shit. If someone were to threaten to rape me (or commit any violence) over something as frivolous as video games, I wouldn't mind them getting in trouble with their parents, or even arrested.

Yes, complaining about how the world is doesn't solve anything. What also doesn't solve anything is saying "welp that's just the way it is so you should just ignore it". The lack of consequences for threats of violence on the internet is a globally accepted fact, but that doesn't make consequences out of bounds. It also doesn't matter what someone's reasoning is for retaliating: If I get people saying they're going to rape me, I'm going to do whatever the fuck I want for any reason. The reviewer's reasons are completely secondary, and are nothing but semantics you can further your argument using.

 

Can't really feel too bad in the end. Neat story, funny stuff really, but you review video games on youtube. You're surprised by shit comments? Cmon.

Yeah no, retaliating to someone being shitty is always on the table, and you don't have to be surprised to retaliate. In the same way those kids can make rape threats, you can text their mom about it. That's the equal-footing platform that is the internet. Do you really think this is the first time the reviewer has received shitty comments?
WaeV likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiddy-bits:

Yes, complaining about how the world is doesn't solve anything. What also doesn't solve anything is saying "welp that's just the way it is so you should just ignore it". The lack of consequences for threats of violence on the internet is a globally accepted fact, but that doesn't make consequences out of bounds. It also doesn't matter what someone's reasoning is for retaliating: If I get people saying they're going to rape me, I'm going to do whatever the fuck I want for any reason. The reviewer's reasons are completely secondary, and are nothing but semantics you can further your argument using.

 

Yeah no, retaliating to someone being shitty is always on the table, and you don't have to be surprised to retaliate. In the same way those kids can make rape threats, you can text their mom about it. That's the equal-footing platform that is the internet. Do you really think this is the first time the reviewer has received shitty comments?

 

 

 

K, so first off, no her reasons are not secondary information. They're as secondary as the types of messages she was receiving, as secondary as who she was calling, and as secondary as who was receiving the message. It's a part of the story same as any other, and you're the one using it to further your viewpoint by saying it's "unrelated". Everything relates to a story, and if you choose to ignore parts because they don't fit your happy-view of the world and how it should be that's on you. 

Second part, I never said the opposite, I actually agreed with you there. I just happened to include the part where her actions are either entirely driven for attention, or completely foolish and illadvised. Nothing she did here will make her life  better, except for the few stories on media that got her attention for her "career". Unfortuantely for her, the attention she gets will all be negative. 

So, it turns out that if she had just said "Welp that's just the way it is I should ignore it", she would've been better of. Go figure, sometimes it's better not to pick a fight with the internet, and to just walk away the bigger man. But hey, at least she got the last word in. She sure showed them! 

 

There's fights worth fighting, but rape threats on the internet isn't it. Hopefully, this doesn't end like all the other times someone decided they were stronger than an entire world of angry teens who want nothing more than to tear someone down until they kill themselves. 

 

 

And if you still care to disagree, let's ignore her reasons, let's ignore the actions. All I'd like to see is even one long-term benefit from this. Give me one benefit doing this has had, or will have for her. Real-World benefits too, no "asserting her independence" bullshit, how will this improve her life? 

swamp and TCK like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mars what you seem to be saying is, "I have a right to stoop to their level," and while that's true, it isn't necessarily a good idea. We all do it from time to time but it's clear-cut the wrong way to go.

 

Also what you're not taking into consideration is that this isn't just an average internet user; it's someone who actively seeks attention because she has a channel to promote. I doubt she was actually "uncomfortable" over the threats, that's likely a facade for the sake of the story.

swamp likes this

Umh7x1l.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Places like Facebook and Twitter could certainly stand some moderation. If you want free license to (jokingly?) threaten or insult people, go to 4chan or elsewhere. Those places aren't going away.

 

Retaliation isn't necessarily commendable, but in the absence of moderation it's a satisfying way of getting back at those making the threats. We shouldn't take this woman as a role model, but she's certainly not at fault here. I think this post is really about awareness of harassment rather than endorsing internet vigilantism.

Takka and Floofies like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am avidly waiting for this to be used to segue into the Net Neutrality argument by a politician, requiring all internet users to provide their IRL information, using Google+ as an example platform to aid in their depiction of government sponsored system to provide  a "better internet". 

 

Places like Facebook and Twitter could certainly stand some moderation. If you want free license to (jokingly?) threaten or insult people, go to 4chan or elsewhere. Those places aren't going away.

 

Retaliation isn't necessarily commendable, but in the absence of moderation it's a satisfying way of getting back at those making the threats. We shouldn't take this woman as a role model, but she's certainly not at fault here. I think this post is really about awareness of harassment rather than endorsing internet vigilantism.

 

I'm right there with you, but this isn't going to happen, unless those communities do it upon their own accord. Legally, unless the people threatening can commit the act, it's nothing, but hyperbole. Watts v. US has established that the threat must be true and capable of being carried out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.