4 ms·

You sue the person who made the post.

by idoh 5y ago

dragontamer 5y ago
And if that person is a negative-review farm out in (insert 3rd world country here) who was paid $10 to write 100 fake negative reviews, how does that help? What, are you gonna ask the authorities to extradite him into the US to show up in his appropriate court date? Everyone knows that you pay offshore troll farms for your negative reviews / disinformation these days. EDIT: Heck, there's a huge market for fake offshore accounts. You can buy fake offshore accounts and do the negative trolling yourself these days. (3rd world citizen "farmed" thousands of accounts on Facebook, to bypass the moderators. 3rd world person sells those accounts to someone nasty, and then the nasty person uses the account to troll / harass / misinform) Its a well known fact that moderators mostly look at new accounts. 3rd world citizen actively using an account and look vaguely "humanish" for 30 days is enough to bypass the bulk of Facebook moderation. You ain't winning this battle. Not with the current set of laws, not with the current set of techniques being used. You have a better chance of suing Fox News / CNN. Seriously.
- coding123 5y ago
  Well it's simpler than that. Even if it was a known and specific American that can be sued, there are literally 10000s of them. A Judge may look poorly on a lawsuit where 1 of them was chosen - he'll say, why are you not going after the other 9999? The legal case there is this person is obviously unfairly chosen, and is likely just rebroadcasting a popular sentiment. It would also go nowhere if it had to get to casting a jury.
  - mjmahone17 5y ago
    Maybe we need a class-offensive suit? Basically allow suing a class as a whole, where if the class loses each member (named in the suit up front) gets a lien? Or perhaps if you can identify the tree of dissemination, you can roll up all the harm from each individual actor and apply it against a higher level instigator to get the entire pyramid (up to that instigator’s level) worth of damages out of one actor.
    - dragontamer 5y ago
      Moderators must take responsibility for some (but maybe not all) of the words that are said on their platforms. Swatting and Doxing are two kinds of content that must be moderated, and I believe we can morally say that these two behaviors must be stopped. Revenge porn maybe as well, and some other rules of the internet. I don't know where to go for "fake reviews" or how to police that behavior. I simply am not imaginative enough to come up with a law or rule that's useful. Its clearly damaging behavior. More of a thing on Amazon than Facebook really, but it still happens on social media (Facebook reviews, Yelp).

You sue the person who made the post.

by idoh 5y ago

You sue the person who made the post.

And if that person is a negative-review farm out in (insert 3rd world country here) who was paid $10 to write 100 fake negative reviews, how does that help? What, are you gonna ask the authorities to extradite him into the US to show up in his appropriate court date? Everyone knows that you pay offshore troll farms for your negative reviews / disinformation these days. EDIT: Heck, there's a huge market for fake offshore accounts. You can buy fake offshore accounts and do the negative trolling yourself these days. (3rd world citizen "farmed" thousands of accounts on Facebook, to bypass the moderators. 3rd world person sells those accounts to someone nasty, and then the nasty person uses the account to troll / harass / misinform) Its a well known fact that moderators mostly look at new accounts. 3rd world citizen actively using an account and look vaguely "humanish" for 30 days is enough to bypass the bulk of Facebook moderation. You ain't winning this battle. Not with the current set of laws, not with the current set of techniques being used. You have a better chance of suing Fox News / CNN. Seriously.

coding123 5y ago
Well it's simpler than that. Even if it was a known and specific American that can be sued, there are literally 10000s of them. A Judge may look poorly on a lawsuit where 1 of them was chosen - he'll say, why are you not going after the other 9999? The legal case there is this person is obviously unfairly chosen, and is likely just rebroadcasting a popular sentiment. It would also go nowhere if it had to get to casting a jury.
- mjmahone17 5y ago
  Maybe we need a class-offensive suit? Basically allow suing a class as a whole, where if the class loses each member (named in the suit up front) gets a lien? Or perhaps if you can identify the tree of dissemination, you can roll up all the harm from each individual actor and apply it against a higher level instigator to get the entire pyramid (up to that instigator’s level) worth of damages out of one actor.
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    Moderators must take responsibility for some (but maybe not all) of the words that are said on their platforms. Swatting and Doxing are two kinds of content that must be moderated, and I believe we can morally say that these two behaviors must be stopped. Revenge porn maybe as well, and some other rules of the internet. I don't know where to go for "fake reviews" or how to police that behavior. I simply am not imaginative enough to come up with a law or rule that's useful. Its clearly damaging behavior. More of a thing on Amazon than Facebook really, but it still happens on social media (Facebook reviews, Yelp).