4 ms·
> Because getting on the wrong end of a Twitter dogpile is astonishingly easy to do. If the stakes were higher, and not only future careers but all existing con
by lliamander 7y ago
> Because getting on the wrong end of a Twitter dogpile is astonishingly easy to do. If the stakes were higher, and not only future careers but all existing contracts would be ruined, that would just inspire more dogpile.
IANAL, but this is a good time to remind people that, in the U.S., but actively trying to sabotage a contract between two parties may be tortious interference[1], and something one can be sued for.
If social media platforms made reporting of and discovery for these kinds of behaviors easier, I suspect we would see a drop-off in such dogpiling.
[1] https://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/liability-and-insurance/tortious-interference.html https://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/liability-and-insurance/to...
- pjc50 7y agoAre you arguing that pointing out to Hachette that Woody Allen's daughter accuses him of sexual assault should render someone liable? And this is supposed to be the pro free speech position? Nobody on Twitter did anything but speech, did they?
- lliamander 7y ago> Are you arguing that pointing out to Hachette that Woody Allen's daughter accuses him of sexual assault should render someone liable? I'm not talking about that specific case, but about the problem of twitter mobs in general (which is what the parent comment was talking about). It may apply to that case or not, but I'm not rendering judgement on that here. > Nobody on Twitter did anything but speech, did they? Telling the truth is not a tort. Often the behavior of twitter mobs rises above simply "telling the truth" and may involve epithets, slander, etc. which are not protected. EDIT: Also, saying "break your contract or else we will harass you" is probably a tort