4 ms·
> So far disagreeing with you = [...] what 'guilty' parties do to silence their critics. I don't think that is a fair assessment of the above claim. The claim
by jlgreco 13y ago
> So far disagreeing with you = [...] what 'guilty' parties do to silence their critics.
I don't think that is a fair assessment of the above claim.
The claim is that threats of libel suits are what guilty parties do to silence their critics, not disagreeing.
- pyre 13y agoCalling libel suits the "tactic of snakes" doesn't really help out since libel is an actual thing that can severely damage a person's reputation.
- jlgreco 13y agoLibel suits (or threats of them) where there isn't actually something that most reasonable people would consider libel is the tactic of snakes. It is nothing more than a specific case of SLAPP. Furthermore, I would loosely file "warning somebody about libel suits where there realistically is no chance of one occurring" under "'concern' trolling". Even if what @geuis said was libel (and to be clear, it isn't), there is fuck-all probability that he will become entangled in a libel lawsuit over it. Nobody but the deranged give a shit what random semi-anonymous nobodies with no influence or credibility say about them on the internet.