5 ms·

People that lie and defame anonymously should be hunted down. You have no right to such a behavior in civil society.

im3w1l 6y ago
I think it's way more complicated than that. First you have to make a distinction between public and private persons. And then there is also the distinction between maliciously defaming someone, and passing on things you heard in good faith. If you heard that your neighbor Bob is a creepy pedo, then warning other people is frankly natural. If you dislike Bob and make up a rumor about him that should be illegal. For powerful public persons the balance is different. The benefits of being able to freely discuss them starts outweighing the harm they suffer from false allegations. That's my current thinking anyway.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  And then there is also the distinction between maliciously defaming someone, and passing on things you heard in good faith. No, there isn't, morally or legally. If you make defamatory statements, it doesn't matter whether you made them up or simply heard someone else say them and are just passing them along. It's still defamatory, and that's how US law treats such statements (and how it has always treated defamatory statements). Truth is the defense to a defamation lawsuit, not "a little bird told me." TLDR: unless you actually know that Bob is a pedo because you witnessed his crimes or he has been convicted, don't defame Bob.
  - im3w1l 6y ago
    I didn't see it myself but my wife Alice did.
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      That doesn't change anything.
dhdjidin 6y ago
These were posts on 4chan, which has (or had) a banner to the effect of "the stories posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact". Its not anon's problem if Facebook boomers aren't ready to post with the big boys
disown 6y ago
Okay anonuser123456... > You have no right to such a behavior in civil society. That's the justification used in every society that oppressed. "Civil" seems like the mantra used by one side to demand control and censorship today when in the past, it was the other side.

I think it's way more complicated than that. First you have to make a distinction between public and private persons. And then there is also the distinction between maliciously defaming someone, and passing on things you heard in good faith. If you heard that your neighbor Bob is a creepy pedo, then warning other people is frankly natural. If you dislike Bob and make up a rumor about him that should be illegal. For powerful public persons the balance is different. The benefits of being able to freely discuss them starts outweighing the harm they suffer from false allegations. That's my current thinking anyway.

gamblor956 6y ago
And then there is also the distinction between maliciously defaming someone, and passing on things you heard in good faith. No, there isn't, morally or legally. If you make defamatory statements, it doesn't matter whether you made them up or simply heard someone else say them and are just passing them along. It's still defamatory, and that's how US law treats such statements (and how it has always treated defamatory statements). Truth is the defense to a defamation lawsuit, not "a little bird told me." TLDR: unless you actually know that Bob is a pedo because you witnessed his crimes or he has been convicted, don't defame Bob.
- im3w1l 6y ago
  I didn't see it myself but my wife Alice did.
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    That doesn't change anything.

dhdjidin 6y ago

These were posts on 4chan, which has (or had) a banner to the effect of "the stories posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact". Its not anon's problem if Facebook boomers aren't ready to post with the big boys

disown 6y ago

Okay anonuser123456... > You have no right to such a behavior in civil society. That's the justification used in every society that oppressed. "Civil" seems like the mantra used by one side to demand control and censorship today when in the past, it was the other side.