3 ms·
Yes, you've defined what makes the judgement absurd. And because it's multiplicative and due solely to "mean words said on blog", then that leaves sane people t
by yucky 4y ago
Yes, you've defined what makes the judgement absurd. And because it's multiplicative and due solely to "mean words said on blog", then that leaves sane people to see how ridiculous the whole thing is.
Imagine for a minute if Trump decided to sue everyone who called him a Russian agent on TV or in writing. The award would be in the trillions.
- thwayunion 4y ago
- yucky 4y agoI don't think this is a place for ad hominem attacks. I also don't feel like defending Alex Jones, so at this point we've probably taken this as far as we can. Unless someone else comes through with a different example of what is effectively a billion dollar fine given to a blogger. I'll keep an eye out but I won't hold my breath.
- NikolaNovak 4y agoI'm enjoying this educational thread from the side / all sides, and trying to stay a reader more than participant as I'm not a lawyer, but I don't feel this can be honestly characterized as "mean things said in internet". This was repeated, wilful, cognizant and extremely damaging willification of inocent people, as well as causing and inciting real action and damage, to a massive audience. If I repeatedly and authoritatively tell millions of people to kill themselves, that's not "mean thing said on blog". If I repeatedly and authoritatively tell millions of people that murdered children were actors and incite my audience to action, that's not "mean things said on a blog". Discussion is much more interesting and productive if everybody engages in basic intellectual honesty in making their argument.