Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Deja vu!

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Members of a certain age may remember the wonderful Floella Benjamin from the BBC children's programme 'Play School'.

Floella is now a member of the House of Lords for the Liberal Democrats. In an interview that I saw yesterday, she explained that she has always fought for the rights of and protection for the most vulnerable and discriminated against in society. She went on to say that she believes that children are our most vulnerable citizens because they don't have a voice and that this is why she is putting her support behind the Online Safety Bill, particularly with regards to preventing children from accessing online pornography.

---------- Post added at 07:12 ---------- Previous post was at 06:47 ----------

Yesterday's Radio 4 programme 'You & Yours' contained a report about the growing problem of facebook and Instagram accounts being taken over by scammers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016xqv

Many of these are owned by small businesses. Once they have taken control, they try to blackmail the true account holders because they know that these sites are essential to their business, but even those that do pay don't get their accounts back.

Instead, the friends/followers of the accounts are scammed for money in the name of the true account holder.

Reporting this to Meta, who own these sites, has proved fruitless. People are ignored, sent into a permanent reporting loop or asked to provide evidence of ownership. One man supplied them with a copy of his passport and a solicitors letter to verify his identity as requested and they still failed to act, meaning that more and more of his friends were being sucked into the scam in his name.

A Conservative MP, Kevin Hollingway from the Treasury Select Committee, said that the Online Safety Bill will not only be about dealing with harm, including financial harm, but about preventing it from happening in the first place and that it is hoped that the threat of substantial fines and personal liability for the owners/directors of websites will provide an incentive to focus their attention to prevent or deal with such incidents properly in the first place.

As it stands, complainants feel angry, frustrated and stalled because they have nobody else to turn to to resolve matters.

Private legal action is also being considered to force Meta to compensate users for their inaction.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

The Online Safety Bill will also now be used to combat the malicious spreading of misinformation:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016xvj

I imagine that this will be in relation to things like covid, interfering with our elections & referendums etc.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Who decides what's misinformation and what isn't?

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

You mean the "government to control everything yo say and do on the internet" bill.

Its clear it has little to do with safety and everything to do with controlling and censoring your entire use of the net.

Big brother is watching you.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

That’ll be the wokes, of course, who will have the power to cancel you without trial.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Is it a bird?

Is it a plane?

It’s SUPERWOKE!

"the wokes"? You’ve been sniffing the wacky baccy again, haven’t you?

(or at least, drinking the Express/Mail/Telegraph Kool-Aid).

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

:clap::clap:So true

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

We know who they are…. :grind:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

It will be Ofcom who ultimately decide, but I imagine (and hope) that they do it after consultation with the Government and expert advisors.

This part of the bill will need to be handled with tact & sensitivity. For example, there were a lot of people who genuinely believed that covid was a conspiracy or that 5G masts were involved with it.

Some of these people were so convinced that medical staff were involved and actually killing people that they were going into hospitals shouting and insulting hard pressed staff.

Whilst I understand that people must be stopped from posting/sharing potentially harmful nonsense to influence others, imagine the accusations of censorship and possible civil disobedience that would have arisen if the Government had of made it an offence to post/share this material on the internet at the height of the pandemic.

We don't want a similar situation to Russia where people are punished for daring to suggest that Russia is at war with Ukraine.

I accept that this part of the bill may be problematic.

---------- Post added at 17:55 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------

That's rather unfair as there are lots of provisions to deal with paedophiles, scammers, trolls, protecting minors from accessing porn.etc.

Nothing will change for the vast majority of people who use the internet in a responsible manner.

Unless it's something serious, I imagine that people/companies will initially receive a warning to give them chance to change their behaviour. They won't immediately be thrown into prison or be fined to such an extent that they lose their house or something!

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Who are "they"?

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

I don’t think they’re qualified.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

So it wasnt ok to censor then, but its ok now :confused:

Thats where this is heading.
Ban anything that someone disagrees with.

Its not unfair at all.
We already have laws to deal with paedophiles & scammers.
Who decides who or what a troll is ?

Why should the nanny state "protect" yet again - thats the job of parents.
The major ISPs already provide tools to do it (and you can buy software as well).
Not to mention, these minors are usually looking for it, they dont "accidently" come across it, thats quite hard to do these days, especially for the tech savy generation.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Speaking as a retired secondary school teacher I can attest that the first thing teenagers did in computer lessons was to type in porn in the search engine of choice.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

You can say that again!

---------- Post added at 08:12 ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 ----------

I don't know how you can be so sure about that. Seemingly innocent comments these days get people cancelled. This cure is worse than the disease!

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

If JK Rowling wasn't already well established, would she have been published nowadays?
You have to be able to criticise things, people, groups etc, otherwise you end up with a very distorted and one-sided set of view of those things.
If something is factually wrong, then somebody presenting those incorrect things can be proved wrong. As opposed to the current system of "I don't like it, so you're not allowed to say it, no matter how true it is".

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

If the content was seen as good by a publisher then I'm sure she would be.

Don't think this is true, I think you're possibly extrapolating some unique situations to make a more broad brush statement.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Indeed. This bill aims to protect people (particularly vulnerable groups) from inappropriate behaviour by others.

As an example, take a look at this thread:

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...5#post36121345

Hugh disagreed with my statement that Virgin are again the most complained about company as he believed that it was only partially correct.

He did it in a polite and reasonable manner, so his right to disagree with my statement wouldn't be affected by the new legislation.

Disagreeing with someone else's point of view (as long as it's done in a right manner, with consideration and in a holistic manner) isn't inappropriate behaviour.

Disagreeing with someone's assertion that green is the best colour is fine, but taking the mickey out of them for spelling it wrong when they have declared that they have dyslexia isn't. Disagreeing with everything that they say as a form of harrassment in a gratuitously nasty, snide, sarcastic way (in the same way as has been done countless times) isn't. Mocking someone known to have dementia who says the same thing twice in error isn't.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

May I just add that if someone makes (empty) threats about taking legal action against people who call out daft things they say then isn't fine either, whatever excuse the person uses for saying the daft things.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Even if that meant the publishers offices being protested by Trans Radical Activists, and twitter pile on to campaign against buying any books published by this company that works with hateful transphobe JK Rowling..........

That's what would happen.

It's only now that she has her fame is she above this, but an author starting out wouldn't be touched.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

This post, however, when taken together with all previous posts and compared to how he speaks to others could be viewed as unlawful discrimination and harrassment by Ofcom.

Continuing to contact or refer to someone who has expressly asked them not to is an offence under the Harrassment Act, be it in person, over the phone, by electronic means or in any other way, be it in public or in private. I imagine that a very dim view indeed would be taken of someone who chose to blatantly disregard the law and then went on to publicly mock it's effectiveness.

Referring to a person's known neuro diversity as 'an excuse' and being deliberately disparaging about their attempts to communicate as 'daft' is unlawful under the Equality Act.

I'm surprised that he doesn't know this and would proceed to do it as a Mental Health First Aider, you'd think he'd know better.

In a real life situation, would an attempt to publicly humiliate someone with a stutter for the way that they speak be acceptable?

Likewise, would an attempt to publicly humiliate someone with Touretts Syndrome be referred to as saying 'daft things' following an outburst caused by their tick be made?

Probably not (I hope!), but it does go to show that some people still regard those with neuro diversity issues as fair game and it has to stop.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Even established authors have been cancelled. Only certain groups are allowed to be "upset" or have people "upset" on their behalf. How far would I get if I drew up a list of things and opinions that I fine offensive, and I reported them to the Police?:rolleyes:



In how many instances is the argument more than simply "I don't like it"? Are reasoned arguments given?

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Do we really need to go trawling through all your past posts?

I refer you to my private message of 07:58 23rd August 2016.

Q.E.D.

You're not doing anyone any favours if you're not honest with them. What should you say to someone who's in the midst of a psychotic episode and are threatening to use violence because they think (wrongly) that violence will make everything right and everyone will agree they've done the right thing?

No, the same as I wouldn't ridicule someone about, for example, their accent. However, having a stutter or an accent doesn't give someone carte blanche to say daft things and if they did then they should expect to be picked up it and shouldn't be surprised.

See my previous comment.

What has to stop are people thinking their conditions should be a free pass to get away with each and every action and the consequences. Would you be ok with a known paedophile claiming they should be allowed to do what they want because of their condition? Would you be OK being robber by a registered drug addict because they had to do it to feed their habit? I could go on but I hope even you can get the picture.

Oh, and one last thing. My comment wasn't aimed at you, it was just adding to your list of things you considered to be unacceptable. But I suppose as they say, if the cap fits and all that!

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

J.K. Rowling's book wasn't cancelled as you yourself acknowledge.

Regarding your statement "As opposed to the current system of "I don't like it, so you're not allowed to say it, no matter how true it is" you've not proved this point either.

---------- Post added at 16:48 ---------- Previous post was at 16:42 ----------

No one would know an author's views on transgender issues unless that author was extremely well-known and spoke about them. And people protesting against an unknown author's views would get little media coverage so serve little purpose.

Publishers are pretty keen on the freedom of publication. Mein Kampf is still published in English, for example.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Whether past posts are inspected or not is entirely down to you.

I didn't realise that you had continued to contact me for a further six years, despite being asked not to.

Your ridiculous responses truly show that you don't have a clue about the breadth and severity of the widely varying neuro diverse range of conditions and the potential effects of continuing with your remarks, despite being told about them.

It concerns me greatly that you appear to genuinely believe that your behaviour is appropriate and acceptable.

I suggest that, in order to put this to bed, the best thing for everybody involved is for you to accept an offer of training (arranged in conjunction with your employer. The breaches of the law and of their own diversity policies don't have to be mentioned- the aim is to educate, not punish you), or for you to voluntarily desist with your misinformed and offensive remarks going forward.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

The threat was there, and others have been cancelled.
Link
People are having to self-censor. Are you saying that if you or I wanted to write a book, we wouldn't have to self-censor?
Link
So how many instances are there, where the cancellers properly explain their position? Eg My JK Rowling and Hachette example, simply being "upset" and disagreeing with an opinion, ISN'T a proper explanation and proof of their position being right.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Again, you fail to address the questions with tangential questions and links.

1. No evidence of books being cancelled. Hachette has not cancelled any of Rowling's books. Some staff may not like them but they're still published. We need to look at what's actually happening as oppose to imagining some kind of scifi world where these things might happen..

2. Your statement "As opposed to the current system of "I don't like it, so you're not allowed to say it, no matter how true it is."
Again, no evidence that this is the current system. If there's a market and funding for content we'll hear it, from Nigel Farage to James O'Brien.

---------- Post added at 19:11 ---------- Previous post was at 19:06 ----------

J K Rowling's book was not cancelled by Hachette.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Just because YOU think they are "ridiculous responses" doesnt make them so, you are not the sole judge of what is or is not 'ridiculous '.
You have however proved the point we have been making again and again about opinions being subjective, yours does not match mine atm.

It concerns me that you think yours is (and was).

I suggest you keep your 'suggestions' about what other people should do to yourself.
Perhaps I need to remind you that the only Judge & Jury on CF are the administrators.
If you start with your attempts to control and/or threaten other members again, your membership will be suspended.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Or just block him, but that's too easy isn't it. As you'd not get to use words such as desist or legal action. How many people have you personally threatened with legal action on forums? Funny thing is, whilst I've had some arguments on these forums, not once have I ever been threatened with legal action (apart from you) or have I ever needed to threaten legal action to someone.

The one common problem in all of this seems to be you and I have a very funny feeling that your disability plays no part in that.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

So JK Rowling hasn't been boycotted in several ways? So Hachette have never cancelled a book because the staff complained?
What is more sinister is people having to self-censor. That is by its very nature hidden and is impossible to prove.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Richard, I think you're starting to loose the plot.

---------- Post added at 20:49 ---------- Previous post was at 20:47 ----------

Couldn't agree more.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

You are either very naive or ignorant on this particular subject…...which is absolutely fine. I’ll wait until you catch up or not, doesn’t really matter, but no point in continuing based on that reply.

Proof of the above.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

One of my carers has just found this on the internet from Citizens Advice, who have produced this easy to read document about the subject of disability discrimination.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/la...iscrimination/

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

A couple of programmes from a series about the 1990's that has been on Radio 4 this week.

They cover the problems caused by the emergence of the wild west approach to the rise of the internet (the law of the land didn't suddenly disappear on the day the internet was invented) and the consequences of breaking the law:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016xvj

Robert Carlyle takes us back to a time when the internet seemed like a force for good and reveals how that Utopian ideal turned sour.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016y5m

The story of the so-called crypto-wars, the fight for online privacy between the American government and a bunch of internet renegades known as the cypherpunks.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

The wokes. Have you been following? :)

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

I guess that it must also be approximately 6 years since I asked you to stop contacting or mentioning me, would you agree?

This is what the Equality and Human Rights Commission has to say about inappropriate assumptions or remarks about a person's disability:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

You live in a fantasy world. I'll 'contact' you when I want on here, it's a public forum. If you don't like the way public forums work, bugger off instead of trying to silence people. You have the tools at your finger tips to instantly block people.

I see the actual main part of the message flew over your head. Have you ever thought the problem is you and not your disability.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Nice read, thank you.

A few things did spring to mind while I was reading it. Did one of you carers really find it for you - a little voice that often whispers to me is today shouting it smells BS. I'm also surprised you didn't already know about it as part of your crusading armoury.

Another thing, it's so similar to another guide they've produced (could even been a find and replace in their favourite text editor) you should have a read of the other guide as it might educate you and stop you falling foul of the law in the future. Here's a link.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Not sure this is a great example.

I don't know if it actually is still published but if it is it'll be for historical reference/education and likely prefaced with an explanation as to why it's being published. Probably not for general sale either.

I don't think any publishers would touch a modern-day equivalent of Mein Kampf and rightly so.

That said quite a lot of things do get published and oftentimes these stories of people getting their book dropped find themselves another publisher. At the moment 'anti-woke' books seem to be a genre of it's own. If you find someone online/on tv railing against being cancelled chances are it's because they have a book or upcoming tour to promote.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

I think we need to revisit exactly what an internet troll is?

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

:Yes:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Your further comments have been noted.

---------- Post added at 13:13 ---------- Previous post was at 13:10 ----------

No idea what you are talking about, you need to be concise and clear when dealing with the neuro diverse. Hints, riddles etc simply do not work. Again, i'm surprised that you weren't aware of this.

---------- Post added at 13:18 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------

It can mean various things, though this would come under the offence of deliberately spreading misinformation:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct3bqr

---------- Post added at 13:22 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------

If you look back further up, since you last posted in this thread, I did actually request an apology from you as your remarks upset and offended me greatly.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Note them all you like, you won't bully me into shutting up.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

How odd that you view the Harrassment Act as 'bullying someone to shut up'.

There is someone on here who I thought was deeply unpleasant, until it was brought to my attention that he had a learning difficulty and other multiple mental disabilities too.

These conditions affect the thought process, perception and the ability to communicate effectively, so this must be taken into account.

You have previously declared a disability, but chose not to confirm how this affects you.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

My warning to you clearly was not, you are suspended for 2 weeks.

---------- Post added at 14:13 ---------- Previous post was at 14:11 ----------

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

It's not odd at all, what is odd is you making things up, I've never once said I have a disability.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Who are "the wokes"?

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Nice family, live three doors up, very considerate neighbours

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

What the heck are they........ Really I have no idea:rolleyes:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

They're the past tense of wakes if that helps!

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

That happens all the time on this forum, but we have all managed to survive it. That doesn’t make it right, but it does give us an insight on who we are dealing with.

This is nothing more than a woke attempt to exclude people and I am disappointed that the Conservative government is actually taking this woke nonsense seriously.

---------- Post added at 19:49 ---------- Previous post was at 19:35 ----------

Maybe we should have a list of all those with a disability that leads to hurt, misinterpretation and OTT reactions. Then we could just put them all on ‘ignore’ and everyone would be happy.

---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------

Well, if you don’t know by now, Hugh, I really wouldn’t worry about it (pat, pat). :hugs:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

So you don't know either - fair enough...

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

i know

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Don't tell em Pike papa

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

It’s OK, the OED* already has the definition, so it’s not a secret… ;)

* The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) is widely regarded as the accepted authority on the English language.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

It doesn't tell us who they are- but i know.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Ok putting plainly as I can please define a woke ,I really have no idea what it means :confused:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

If you don't know what it means then apparently you're not woke

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...d-by-the-right

The origins of woke, in this context – as forged by African American communities – dates back at least to the 60s, but its mainstream ubiquity is a recent development. Fuelled by black musicians, social media and the #BlackLivesMatter movement, the term entered the Oxford English Dictionary only in 2017, by which time it had become as much a fashionable buzzword as a set of values. Some of those who didn’t keep up with the trend felt left behind: if you didn’t know the meaning of woke, you weren’t.

Rather than rejecting the concept of wokeness outright, today’s detractors often claim they are rejecting the word as a signifier of pretentiousness and “cultural elitism”. However, as Fox and others have shown, it is as much to do with the issues of racial and social justice. Criticising “woke culture” has become a way of claiming victim status for yourself rather than acknowledging that more deserving others hold that status. It has gone from a virtue signal to a dog whistle. The language has been successfully co-opted – but as long as the underlying injustices remain, new words will emerge to describe them.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Or just another term for the annoying millennials.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Thanks clear as mud ,but I've only read this twice so perhaps try a few more times:dunce:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

A woke is someone who insists on apologising to a person who wasn’t offended in the first place.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

I’m sorry you feel that way… ;)

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

I apologise if I’ve offended you, you poor flower, you!

:ghugs:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

I will be sorry on behalf of all those here that are not sorry.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Peter Andre has throw his support behind the Online Harms Bill after Rebekah Vardy caused him immense distress & humiliation by insinuating that he had a small penis:

https://www.itv.com/hub/loose-women/1a3173a3991

She has since apologised and expressed her regret about saying this.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Some things can't be unsaid. Now the damage has been done. Apologies are worthless, in my view

The funny thing is, as soon as you complain about this sort of thing, you draw attention to it. Better to ignore such remarks. I got called names at school now and again, as I think we all did from time to time, but it didn't destroy my life and send me over the edge.

Sticks and stones, and all that.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Ah! The old it's your fault you get called names you don't like because you complained about it too much forcing me to keep calling you names defence.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

A fist is worth a thousand words.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

That normally settles the argument. Dealing with women, however, is a different matter.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Too much testosterone in this thread.:rolleyes:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Usually all mouth and no trousers… ;)

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

He might have?

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

IIRC what's said in court is libel free,

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Only if relevant, or reported contemporaneously…

https://www.carruthers-law.co.uk/art...ute-privilege/

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

and we care about that muppet because ?

If the bill was actually designed to do what he thinks, it might almost have been useful.

However its not, its designed to allow the government to control everyones access to the internet, and more specifically, control the "social media giants". They dont care how useless or impractical it is, just as long as they "do something".

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

You could have just said he'd thrown his support behind the bill without then going on to repeat the accusation that made him do it in the first place, particularly as you say the accuser has expressed their regret and apologised for making it. I'm sure Peter would be impressed with you repeating it. Would you say it to his face?

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Even if something that's said is actually true, it doesn't give someone the moral right to post about it if it causes humiliation, upset etc.

There could be legal consequences too as well as action taken under the online harms legislation.

---------- Post added at 16:12 ---------- Previous post was at 16:10 ----------

It's called The Barbera Streisand effect.

---------- Post added at 16:14 ---------- Previous post was at 16:12 ----------

In this country protective legislation applies to everyone, regardless of whether we personally like them or not.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

She didn't post anything, it was taken from an interview she did 18yrs ago, and then relayed to her again in the recent trial.

YOU however have posted about it.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Maybe Peter Andre is readying his lawyers ;)

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Karma

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Perhaps Richard will now contemplate how this proposed legislation can have unintended consequences that might be coming at him as well as the rest of us.

The Bill should be killed, and the sooner the better.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

I doubt it.:rolleyes:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

On the BBC lunchtime news, the head of Ofcom (the new media regulator) was reported as saying that site owners must do much more to protect women online from inappropriate online comments, as they are one of the groups most likely to be a victim of this sort of behaviour. Women receive more online abuse than men online and are more distressed by it.

A young folk singer who uses the internet to promote her music described some of the comments she has received as a relentless, distressing and scary pile on.

It's report found that only 42% of women felt confident about speaking freely online:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017xxh

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

So she's worked hard to created a platform for herself to voice her 'opinions' and for her music. Maybe if she kept her opinions to herself and just concentrated on her music she might be a lot better off.

As for the other 58%, I doubt that's got much to do with online abuse.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Richard, it would be helpful if you could point out where in the linked programme the item was, to save CF'ers having to search for it, please?

(for example, in this case, it was at 25:21)

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Says who? Being distressed is a personal thing, not a gender thing.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

While totally take your point ,I don't note as a matter of course , date and times of radio (or any any other media for that matter) . And as it could be some time later I have no hope of remembering such details.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Somehow, Hugh seems to carry all this in his head. It’s a wonder it doesn’t explode!

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

I think you have the wrong part of his anatomy.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

It’s really not very difficult…

If you click on the link Richard provided*, it takes you to the BBC iPlayer; once you start the stream, there is a bar on the bottom of the screen which shows programme duration on the right hand side, and time within the stream on the left hand side.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...2&d=1654114844

*other posters and links are available

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Life's to short :D

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

So’s "to"… ;)

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

A programme that attempts to try and understand why some people hate others and how to stop it:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct3hh3

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

There are indeed people i do hate, there are those i have met and taken a dislike to within seconds of meeting them, there are even some i hate that i have not met in person. it would seem to me it can be a personal thing. For instance there is a Labour politician that i hate with a vengeance and i have been within yards of him.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Nothing wrong with hating anything or anyone, if that’s how you feel about it. It’s subjective so cannot be controlled or stopped.

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Don't " labor" the point :D

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Pretty sure "to" isn't the US English version of "too"... ;)

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.
 

Never ever used it . :dozey:

Re: Police to get tough on internet trolls.