Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Newcastle United' started by Geordieginola, Apr 7, 2021.
He said that one week then the next week said he'd had death threats.
Well which is it then? Are you on or not?
Fairly obvious, if you ask me.
Why should they come off? Just because we still have racist cowardly scum posting on social media doesn’t mean you leave social media to avoid it. You get rid of the racist cowardly scum. Then those affected wouldn’t have to suffer abuse from the cowards or, at least, racist abuse anyway.
Like I say If something bothers you use the block facility or don't use it.
I said they'd come off not that they should
I also said it's not acceptable
Good luck with it
Think you should have to sign up with a Credit Card tbh - £1 to access (or the national equivalent in other countries), it could be as little as £0.01 one off payment when you sign up ffs. If you are U18 then you'd have to have a parent sign up for you as your legal guardian - would also prevent a lot of these nonce's if they knew parents had access to their kids social media accounts.
It has to be regulated. There is no reason not to. I accept it’s not easy but it has to be done. People are abusing others without recourse. There is a difference between difference of opinion or an argument but once it crosses that line. There has to be consequences.
If it's just crappy comments on twitter I don't see why they can't just block/ignore them. It's text on a screen. Randomers calling you names can be ignored.
‘I’ don’t go innit I know a few drunken bums who do.
you’ve been on too
Many porn sites bro
I'm all for tracking these idiots. I personally don't use twitter but any platform has a responsibility to do what is practicable. I hate ****s who use anonymity to racial abuse people etc.
I however see no reason for widespread intrusion into the vast majority of people who don't do such things. I understand the desire but basically I value privacy and freedom as basic human rights. Those rights come with responsibility but I don't think you should have to give them up for others transgressions. The viewpoint of "if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear" is horseshit for me. **** that.
I also think we have to clearly set out what the parameters of abuse are, and also start raising humans again to not be such a bunch of pussies. There are genuine cases of abuse which are unacceptable. However a bit of name calling, people getting clever and getting shot down, sorry its sticks and stones to me. People are way over sensitive so I'd prefer not to chuck the baby out with the bath water.
Except you’re not obliged to go on to social media. It’s not an essential. Privacy and freedom (whatever that means in relation to Twitter) are non relevant and are regularly given up or compromised when you “join” something.
I agree care needs to be exercised in enforcing any regulations and in setting them in the first place as we need to avoid setting “snowflake “ standards. If it’s illegal to say it to someone’s face then that I would suggest is the starting place to say it’s illegal to put it on social media.
Couldn't agree with this at all. You could apply this to everything otherwise, from going to the pub, to going into a shop. They all have rules and behaviour standards we are required to uphold. Privacy and freedom are very much relevant with regard to every aspect of life. People fought for this very premise. On joining a social media platform you are not asked to leave this at the door. Indeed they are required to go to great lengths to explain how your rights will be protected. Just as you are told what the rules are.
100% I believe however you should be punished to full extent of the law where you are found guilty of transgressions. The big problem lies here, people aren't. Not enough effort is made to track them either. Its too easy and these platforms being blunt, see it as an expense they could do without. They are making enough money, its time to give back because their platforms have downsides which have shown themselves over time. I'm not technologically minded enough to know, but I assume they are working to find a way round this issue without having to trample on freedoms and privacy that people have a right to through every walk of life.
You say you don’t agree and then proceed to agree with my point. The fighting for freedom etc isn’t immediately relevant as no one is suggesting anything dictatorial or tyrannical. Just a question of making sure people are able to be held accountable for any illegal actions.
Yes people’s rights are protected but as you say you’re allowed to go into, for example, a pub but only if you abide by the rules that apply thereby giving up some of your privacy (eg CCTV) and your freedom (eg not being able to get absolutely plastered). So long as you know where you stand before doing anything I don’t have an issue as you can always decide not to “do” that particular thing if you don’t like the rules.
Same should apply with all other societal interactions such as Twitter.
Rules don't stop crime.
I have a burglar alarm, but there's still burglars
Actually, they do. Rules don’t stop all crime or criminal behaviour but they do reduce crime and deter criminal behaviour. So rules do stop crime.
So I was right they don't stop it
@the #Cans Master
Rules help im just saying it'll not work unfortunately
No. It does stop crime simply not all of it.
I agree. The trouble, as with a lot of crime, is the lack of resources to enforce the rules. Easier to do if you “force” the Social Media companies to act.
Nope haven't agreed at all. Quite clearly stated that freedom and privacy apply to every walk of life which you contested. What I referred to in terms of freedom is the requirements mentioned by others in this thread as a way of tracing people better. I see no reason for perfectly law abiding citizens to have to give up certain freedoms or privacy simply because others cannot follow basic rules of decency.
Giving up freedoms as a result of transgressions, that's the individuals own fault. But having to attach bank accounts and such like to accounts, sorry that will never sit right with me. Its a punishment and privacy being removed for no other the reason than the actions of a few. You can never eradicate these things completely anyway, so the gains are small. The answer as I have said lies in actually pursuing people and punishing them, we are not doing this to the fullest extent. Walk before you run like anything else. Resorting to things like that should only be considered if all other avenues have been explored and they haven't. The governments have a duty of care to their citizens to ensure companies like Twitter, Facebook etc aren't just walking away with tons of cash while leaving a trail of destruction behind them. If they want to operate here or anywhere else, then the government should place financial demands on them to help regulate. They don't. Instead they give them huge tax breaks