4 ms·

I guess ideological conformity is a good thing for stable society? I don't think this is about "ideological conformity". No one is stopping you thinking, or sa

I guess ideological conformity is a good thing for stable society? I don't think this is about "ideological conformity". No one is stopping you thinking, or saying, whatever you want at any time. The problem is when you use a platform to broadcast that message to a wider audience, especially one like Twitter that will show your posts to people who don't follow you.

mantas 5y ago
That's like prosecuting for saying wrong stuff out in a street because someone may have heard our and friends' chat.
conradfr 5y ago
> No one is stopping you (...) saying, whatever you want at any time. Well it seems this law actually does that.
- onion2k 5y ago
  Only if you think there's no difference between saying something and publishing it on the internet. When I said "saying" I mean that in a literal sense - speaking to people face to face. That is not the same as publishing something.
  - betwixthewires 5y ago
    FYI, and this is in the article, the law used to prosecute the man was written to prevent you from saying offensive things over the telephone. This distinction between a voice and a megaphone doesn't apply to this particular situation because the law itself makes no such distinction.
  - throwaway684936 5y ago
    There are still slander laws, so you're wrong.
candiodari 5y ago
The problem is that that is never, ever, where it stops. There's always people that society suddenly decides are "really important", usually the most dumb-witted, cruel abusers you can come up with. And of course, the rules don't apply to them. Just look at the president of France, if you want to see a particularly bad fuckup. He, and his wife, have confessed, publicly, on TV, repeatedly to having a paedophilic relationship, where she abused her job to fuck children (she was even cheating on her husband doing it). He was 15, she was 40 years old at the time. Not only have they not been sued (in France, both would be punished) Needless to say, a whole bunch of people were sued for stating this during the campaign, as well as for a bunch of other negative things they said about him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitte_Macron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitte_Macron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Macron#Personal_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Macron#Personal_life
- ttybird2 5y ago
  The linked article say that they met when he was 15 and that they became a couple when he was 18. "in France, both would be punished" It seems absurd to me that both the victim and the abuser would be punished. Do you have any source for this?
- onion2k 5y ago
  a whole bunch of people were sued for stating this during the campaign The burden of proof for libel action is very different to the burden of proof for criminal liability. It's the difference between civil and criminal law - they're worlds apart. You can't really compare the two, despite them both being based around the act of writing something on the internet. Posting something potentially libellous on Twitter won't get you convicted of a crime, but it absolutely could get you sued.
  - candiodari 5y ago
    They both said on TV they fucked when he was 15/16, and while she was in a power relationship over him (as his French teacher). Pointing out there might be a problem with that doesn't violate libel laws for a whole host of reasons. Likewise, public confessions satisfy the standard of proof for criminal liability. If you say "I'm glad I killed this guy" next to what looks like a corpse with 100 people watching, you can be convicted of murder without the police so much as checking it's indeed a corpse, based on testimony (does not even need to be direct testimony, done in court, it can be a police officer saying one of the hundred confirmed this to them) of one person. If you say it on TV, well the laws on this predate TVs, I'm sure it will work the same. And, technically, since he was a minor, French law says the public prosecutor HAS to sue the adult (ie. her), no choice. Don't you love "someone think of the children" laws? Needless to say, this didn't happen.
ashtonkem 5y ago
> No one is stopping you thinking, or saying, whatever you want at any time. They literally arrested and prosecuted someone for an off color joke. This is as straightforward a case of “them” stopping you from saying what ever you want at any time as it gets.

mantas 5y ago

That's like prosecuting for saying wrong stuff out in a street because someone may have heard our and friends' chat.

conradfr 5y ago

> No one is stopping you (...) saying, whatever you want at any time. Well it seems this law actually does that.

onion2k 5y ago
Only if you think there's no difference between saying something and publishing it on the internet. When I said "saying" I mean that in a literal sense - speaking to people face to face. That is not the same as publishing something.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  FYI, and this is in the article, the law used to prosecute the man was written to prevent you from saying offensive things over the telephone. This distinction between a voice and a megaphone doesn't apply to this particular situation because the law itself makes no such distinction.
- throwaway684936 5y ago
  There are still slander laws, so you're wrong.

candiodari 5y ago

The problem is that that is never, ever, where it stops. There's always people that society suddenly decides are "really important", usually the most dumb-witted, cruel abusers you can come up with. And of course, the rules don't apply to them. Just look at the president of France, if you want to see a particularly bad fuckup. He, and his wife, have confessed, publicly, on TV, repeatedly to having a paedophilic relationship, where she abused her job to fuck children (she was even cheating on her husband doing it). He was 15, she was 40 years old at the time. Not only have they not been sued (in France, both would be punished) Needless to say, a whole bunch of people were sued for stating this during the campaign, as well as for a bunch of other negative things they said about him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitte_Macron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitte_Macron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Macron#Personal_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Macron#Personal_life

ttybird2 5y ago
The linked article say that they met when he was 15 and that they became a couple when he was 18. "in France, both would be punished" It seems absurd to me that both the victim and the abuser would be punished. Do you have any source for this?
onion2k 5y ago
a whole bunch of people were sued for stating this during the campaign The burden of proof for libel action is very different to the burden of proof for criminal liability. It's the difference between civil and criminal law - they're worlds apart. You can't really compare the two, despite them both being based around the act of writing something on the internet. Posting something potentially libellous on Twitter won't get you convicted of a crime, but it absolutely could get you sued.
- candiodari 5y ago
  They both said on TV they fucked when he was 15/16, and while she was in a power relationship over him (as his French teacher). Pointing out there might be a problem with that doesn't violate libel laws for a whole host of reasons. Likewise, public confessions satisfy the standard of proof for criminal liability. If you say "I'm glad I killed this guy" next to what looks like a corpse with 100 people watching, you can be convicted of murder without the police so much as checking it's indeed a corpse, based on testimony (does not even need to be direct testimony, done in court, it can be a police officer saying one of the hundred confirmed this to them) of one person. If you say it on TV, well the laws on this predate TVs, I'm sure it will work the same. And, technically, since he was a minor, French law says the public prosecutor HAS to sue the adult (ie. her), no choice. Don't you love "someone think of the children" laws? Needless to say, this didn't happen.

ashtonkem 5y ago

> No one is stopping you thinking, or saying, whatever you want at any time. They literally arrested and prosecuted someone for an off color joke. This is as straightforward a case of “them” stopping you from saying what ever you want at any time as it gets.