4 ms·

>Why should anyone put up with that? They shouldn't. Some comments are obviously unacceptable. That's easy. The problem is, as always, where do you draw the

>Why should anyone put up with that? They shouldn't. Some comments are obviously unacceptable. That's easy. The problem is, as always, where do you draw the line? It's the comments at the margins of "acceptability" that are the most difficult to deal with and where the arguments of censorship are sure to come from. "You know it when you see it" is not easy to apply.

nknighthb 13y ago
> The problem is, as always, where do you draw the line? Threats of unlawful violence. This isn't hard. > It's the comments at the margins The US legal system is pretty explicitly biased towards defendants in gray areas, and most marginal cases will never be prosecuted or be thrown out by the judge. Those that make it through to trial will have a jury determine whether a comment is a threat beyond reasonable doubt, and then the trial judge and at least two appellate judges will have to agree that the jury's verdict was not unreasonable. Depending on the precise posture of the case, there are tens of judges and an army of clerks beyond that who may see the case cross their desks and provide at least cursory review. And US courts pay very, very close attention to criminal cases based on speech.
- onebaddude 13y ago
  >The US legal system is pretty explicitly biased towards defendants in gray areas I'm sure Twitter, its users and the legal system are just dying to have marginal cases decided by the courts. What you've described is the problem I was referring to. One person says one thing, another says something else. A third party has to make the decision on whether it's acceptable or not. That's cumbersome, not very clear cut, and leads to one disgruntled party or at least some controversy.
  - nknighthb 13y ago
    No third party has to make a decision for Twitter to decide something is unacceptable on its platform, and I would hope Twitter would be much stricter with people who make threats than courts.
- DanBC 13y ago
  > Threats of unlawful violence. This isn't hard. "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!" £385 and £600 costs. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Joke_Trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Joke_Trial)
  - nknighthb 13y ago
    Good. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6152125 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6152125

nknighthb 13y ago

> The problem is, as always, where do you draw the line? Threats of unlawful violence. This isn't hard. > It's the comments at the margins The US legal system is pretty explicitly biased towards defendants in gray areas, and most marginal cases will never be prosecuted or be thrown out by the judge. Those that make it through to trial will have a jury determine whether a comment is a threat beyond reasonable doubt, and then the trial judge and at least two appellate judges will have to agree that the jury's verdict was not unreasonable. Depending on the precise posture of the case, there are tens of judges and an army of clerks beyond that who may see the case cross their desks and provide at least cursory review. And US courts pay very, very close attention to criminal cases based on speech.

onebaddude 13y ago
>The US legal system is pretty explicitly biased towards defendants in gray areas I'm sure Twitter, its users and the legal system are just dying to have marginal cases decided by the courts. What you've described is the problem I was referring to. One person says one thing, another says something else. A third party has to make the decision on whether it's acceptable or not. That's cumbersome, not very clear cut, and leads to one disgruntled party or at least some controversy.
- nknighthb 13y ago
  No third party has to make a decision for Twitter to decide something is unacceptable on its platform, and I would hope Twitter would be much stricter with people who make threats than courts.
DanBC 13y ago
> Threats of unlawful violence. This isn't hard. "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!" £385 and £600 costs. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Joke_Trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Joke_Trial)
- nknighthb 13y ago
  Good. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6152125 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6152125