3 ms·
This is why I've largely stopped getting into internet arguments. You never know when you've pissed off the wrong crowd.
by Magi604 3y ago
This is why I've largely stopped getting into internet arguments. You never know when you've pissed off the wrong crowd.
- richbell 3y agoA sad example: https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/14/us/swatting-sentence-casey-viner/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/14/us/swatting-sentence-casey-vi...
- sph 3y ago15 months.. and the judge that asks "gamers to self-police so this does not happen again" What a fucking joke.
- 15457345234 3y agoUnfortunately that just leads to the territory being controlled by the deranged who are prepared to flip out and take everything to a 10. It would be nice if we didn't cede the internet to that metaphorical crazy guy who lurks outside the gas station holding a crowbar and muttering to himself
- antiframe 3y agoWhat were the benefits to you of getting into an Internet argument before being swatted became a threat?
- 15457345234 3y agoThe pen is mightier than the sword; you're writing for the benefit of the audience. Rebutting 'hot takes' matters. It really does matter. If it didn't matter they wouldn't resort to SWATting and stuff to try and shut it down.
- antiframe 3y agoI guess I am imagining something different when I read "Internet argument". I picture those long two-poster Reddit threads going back and forth angrily calling each other names and essentially saying "no, you're wrong". I never imagined engaging a "hot take" with a cogent argument to have any effect in changing opinions, especially when the response is intense anger.
- KingMob 3y agoPerhaps a good defense, but the target of the article didn't get into an internet argument with anyone, and he's still been targeted. Have to stay off the internet entirely.
- minor_e_celeb 3y agoPatrick S. Tomlinson is infamous for picking fights with everyone, including the police.
- strken 3y agoThe article doesn't discuss it, and I'm also wary of getting into it too much because it sounds like victim blaming, but the man from the article gets into internet arguments pretty much constantly. He's kept the attention of his various trolls by repeatedly engaging them. Of course, arguing on the internet does not excuse trying to get him killed by the police. It does however provide important context on how to avoid getting swatted yourself.
- BryantD 3y agoIf you mean “by talking about what they’re doing,” yes. The language you’re using here is the same language the people targeting him use. I assume this is accidental on your part.
- strken 3y agoIf you're getting attacked by internet strangers with no empathy and a desire to hurt you for kicks then it's probably pretty effective to leave the internet, and if you can't leave the internet you can still stop talking to them. This is not a justification for their actions in any way. Still, the article implicitly leans into the It Could Happen To You angle, and it's very unlikely to happen to someone who doesn't get into internet arguments under their real name when their personal income is also at stake. I have no idea what language the people attacking him use. "Don't feed the trolls" is a decades old aphorism by now. It works. Most of us don't need to be afraid - to let the Intercept and a 17 year old with a telegram channel add another source of fear to our lives.