6 ms·

I don't think they took them seriously because video games, and because the entire thing appeared so unbelievably silly from the outside. I wonder if they might

by api 9y ago

I don't think they took them seriously because video games, and because the entire thing appeared so unbelievably silly from the outside. I wonder if they might take them more seriously now?

hurint 9y ago
You are talking about anonymous twitter accounts and 4chan posts. For all we know the 'victims' could have made them themself to get fools like you to give them Patreon bucks.
belorn 9y ago
I recall that the systemd package maintainer for Debian got death threats. From outside, hearing about death threats related to volunteer work to package software that is given out for free is something I strongly suspect sound unbelievably odd. This happened after gamergate and I doubt anyone got arrested for it. I recall a few months ago during the days of meeto here in Sweden, children of accused parent got threatened thus resulting in the family leaving the country for a while. No investigation was mentioned in the news article. From what I see, now is not better than before. Death threats made online/sms/phone is not taken serious unless there is contributing reasons to take it serious.
base698 9y ago
https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/05/cyberbll.html https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/05/cyberbll.html Her article seems to be about what could be done to stop anonymous trolls from terrorizing and threatening women. How about prosecuting them, since terroristic threats is already a crime? Unfortunately, as Hess discovers, the police don't care much about online stalking, which is consistent since they don't care about IRL stalking either.
- wildmusings 9y ago
  The Supreme Court has ruled that only specific and credible threats can be prosecuted. Other threats, distasteful and disgusting as they are, are protected as free speech. It's gonna be very hard to prove that an online troll mouthing off constitutes a specific and credible threat. And the Justice Department is usually not interested in borderline cases, both for efficiency and out of fear of creating unfavorable precedent. This is a country where you're allowed to burn someone in effigy and call for their execution, protest soldiers' funerals and celebrate their death as punishment for America tolerating gays, call for the overthrow of the US government, hold up a mock severed-head of the President, publicly hope for his assassination, etc. We take a rather expansive and absolutist view of free speech.
  - manicdee 9y ago
    Does ringing a wonan’s Phone number and threatening rape, torture and murder count as a death threat? What about turning up on her doorstep and threatening her in person? At what point does a threat become specific and credible?
    - dogma1138 9y ago
      It varies on a case by case basis.

by api 9y ago

I don't think they took them seriously because video games, and because the entire thing appeared so unbelievably silly from the outside. I wonder if they might take them more seriously now?

hurint 9y ago

You are talking about anonymous twitter accounts and 4chan posts. For all we know the 'victims' could have made them themself to get fools like you to give them Patreon bucks.

belorn 9y ago

I recall that the systemd package maintainer for Debian got death threats. From outside, hearing about death threats related to volunteer work to package software that is given out for free is something I strongly suspect sound unbelievably odd. This happened after gamergate and I doubt anyone got arrested for it. I recall a few months ago during the days of meeto here in Sweden, children of accused parent got threatened thus resulting in the family leaving the country for a while. No investigation was mentioned in the news article. From what I see, now is not better than before. Death threats made online/sms/phone is not taken serious unless there is contributing reasons to take it serious.

base698 9y ago

https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/05/cyberbll.html https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/05/cyberbll.html Her article seems to be about what could be done to stop anonymous trolls from terrorizing and threatening women. How about prosecuting them, since terroristic threats is already a crime? Unfortunately, as Hess discovers, the police don't care much about online stalking, which is consistent since they don't care about IRL stalking either.

wildmusings 9y ago
The Supreme Court has ruled that only specific and credible threats can be prosecuted. Other threats, distasteful and disgusting as they are, are protected as free speech. It's gonna be very hard to prove that an online troll mouthing off constitutes a specific and credible threat. And the Justice Department is usually not interested in borderline cases, both for efficiency and out of fear of creating unfavorable precedent. This is a country where you're allowed to burn someone in effigy and call for their execution, protest soldiers' funerals and celebrate their death as punishment for America tolerating gays, call for the overthrow of the US government, hold up a mock severed-head of the President, publicly hope for his assassination, etc. We take a rather expansive and absolutist view of free speech.
- manicdee 9y ago
  Does ringing a wonan’s Phone number and threatening rape, torture and murder count as a death threat? What about turning up on her doorstep and threatening her in person? At what point does a threat become specific and credible?
  - dogma1138 9y ago
    It varies on a case by case basis.