Police to get tough on internet trolls.

[RichardCoulter]

There was a feature by Martin Lewis today as he was one of the leading campaigners who got financial scams included in the Online Safery Bill:

https://www.itv.com/hub/this-morning/2a6292a0829

A young lady who suffered facial disfigurement after an accident was featured on Radio 4 today:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0016ppk

1 in 111 people have a facial disfigurement and they (like disabled people) suffer from abuse, bullying, harrassment etc with snide, sarcastic comments & assumptions about this, both on and offline. This new legislation will be geared to prevent people from being allowed to get away with this, though it's a real pity that it's needed.

https://www.itv.com/hub/this-morning/2a6292a0829

---------- Post added at 23:08 ---------- Previous post was at 22:49 ----------

Originally Posted by Carth

I'm willing to bet 38p that sometime today, a phrase similar to 'cognitive impairment*' will get used . . .




*get out of jail free card*

I find this post to be very offensive, however, this may be due to a lack of knowledge about this condition. This link provides information about cognitive impairment. I suggest that you read it for your own sake as about half of us will get dementia and the effects are similar: You or a loved one are likely to be affected:

https://www.psychguides.com/neurolog...ers/cognitive/

---------- Post added at 23:26 ---------- Previous post was at 23:08 ----------

Originally Posted by Hom3r

Trouble is, Bots would be needed to search for violations.

But there is only one issue.

They can't tell the difference between real abuse and when a fan page on Facebook quotes a line from a program or film.


Take the line in the film Taken, where he says to his daughter's kidnapper that "I will find you and kill you". FB says that a threat and bans you

You make a good point. A bot cannot tell the difference in tone/meaning of what's been said. It can sometimes be difficult for a human to understand what is actually meant by the written word, so a bot will have no chance!

It's not just words, pictures can be flagged up by bots too. There was a picture of Hitler going round Facebook with Putin as his son. Because the bot picked up that a picture of Hitler being posted, those that posted it were flagged up as posting inappropriate material!

There will have to be increased human involvement, I can't see any other way around it, though i'm sure that the large social media platforms will be able to afford the extra wages.

Maybe posts which are reported or flagged up by the bots will be hidden from view until assessed by a human member of staff?? I expect there will be allsorts of ways to do it and each platform will decide what works best for them.

[RichardCoulter]

The Online Safety Bill was featured on last nights Question Time.

Points discussed included concerns about free speech, the responsibility of Government to ensure responsible free speech and the need to protect vulnerable people online. It was stated that it would become law shortly.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016tk6

[Carth]

I hope there are enough solicitors to cope with the demand

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Carth

I hope there are enough solicitors to cope with the demand

I'm sure some people already have their legal teams lined up, straining at the leash, and ready to go .

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth

I'm sure some people already have their legal teams lined up, straining at the leash, and ready to go .

Surely VPN would hide them if they really wanted to hide however I am sure someone here will be able to confirm it if correct ?

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Surely VPN would hide them if they really wanted to hide however I am sure someone here will be able to confirm it if correct ?

Using a VPN doesn't guarantee online trolls anonymity. A lot of sites forbid their use; I believe that this is one of them.

There are calls for only those who have verified their identity to post user generated content. I have sympathy with this* as, if someone is prepared to say something online, they should be prepared to back this up as 'themselves' and face any consequences that may arise. One example would be an employee working for an employer who promotes the ethics of equal opportunity & diversity and insists that their employees espouse this too, whilst they are harrasimg & trolling someone in one of the protected groups. Hopefully the fact that they would be liable to disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal, will be enough of a deterrent.

There was one man caught by a troll hunting team. In public, he was a pillar of the community, he did voluntary work to help local residents etc. It was later revealed that he spent his evenings going down to his shed (in order to hide it from his wife) to troll a woman to the point that it made her ill. He ended up losing his job and the respect of his local community.

* I can see circumstances where this may be warranted eg Russia. I don't suppose there is any harm in people continuing to use fictitious user names in the UK, as long as their true details are available to be passed on by the site owners should any issues arise.

---------- Post added at 22:29 ---------- Previous post was at 22:01 ----------

Originally Posted by Carth

I hope there are enough solicitors to cope with the demand

I'm sure that it won't come to that with the vast majority of people. A lot of offensive things aren't said out of malice, but ignorance, particularly where people have no experience of the subject matter.

Having said that, your earlier inappropriate remark about the neuro diverse really did upset me and an apology would be very much appreciated.

If you struggle to understand and empathise with those with mental illness, mental disability or learning difficulties in general, may I recommend a Radio 4 series that covers the whole spectrum of neuro diversify. It's called 'All In The Mind' and it's broadcast twice a week, but is also available on BBC Sounds here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qxx9

I do hope that you find it interesting and informative

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Using a VPN doesn't guarantee online trolls anonymity. A lot of sites forbid their use; I believe that this is one of them.

You believe incorrectly, we have no rules against VPN use.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

There are calls for only those who have verified their identity to post user generated content.

From clueless idiots who cant see any further than tw*tter or fakebook.
This forum does not 'verify your identity', and has no plans to do so. It causes no issues.

Nor btw, do we verify your 'facilitator', who seems to be editing your posts.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Paul

You believe incorrectly, we have no rules against VPN use.



From clueless idiots who cant see any further than tw*tter or fakebook.
This forum does not 'verify your identity', and has no plans to do so. It causes no issues.

Nor btw, do we verify your 'facilitator', who seems to be editing your posts.

As my health seems to be deteriorating, I seem to be making more spelling mistakes, grammatical errors etc, so I often ask whichever facilitator is on shift to correct this if i've written a post without any assistance.

I seem to remember a post made some time ago (by Sirius IIRC, apologies if this is incorrect). I think it was in this actual thread, where he said that he was switching off his VPN in order to comply with the t&c's or something similar.

Unfortunately, I have to accept that it's entirely possible that my neurological condition has confused me though and I ask people to kindly be understanding of this.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

As my health seems to be deteriorating, I seem to be making more spelling mistakes, grammatical errors etc, so I often ask whichever facilitator is on shift to correct this if i've written a post without any assistance.

I seem to remember a post made some time ago (by Sirius IIRC, apologies if this is incorrect). I think it was in this actual thread, where he said that he was switching off his VPN in order to comply with the t&c's or something similar.

Unfortunately, I have to accept that it's entirely possible that my neurological condition has confused me though and I ask people to kindly be understanding of this.

I turned it off as i thrust the team here. I do know at one time i was under the misunderstanding that a VPN is not allowed here but that was clarified as not true.

I use a VPN when i feel that a site is not trustworthy or i feel that there are people on a forum i do not trust as they have an agender.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I turned it off as i thrust the team here. I do know at one time i was under the misunderstanding that a VPN is not allowed here but that was clarified as not true.

I use a VPN when i feel that a site is not trustworthy or i feel that there are people on a forum i do not trust as they have an agender.

Thank you for clarifying this, it's good to know that my memory hasn't been completely destroyed

[RichardCoulter]

Each morning, during the Radio 4 breakfast programme 'Today', there is a segment called 'Thought for the Day'. This is where reflections are offered from a faith perspective on issues and people in the news.

This morning, following the MP admitting that he had viewed pornography in Parliament, Rhidian Brook took a look at the issue of pornography.

He began by examining the negative aspects of online porn, including the normalisation of violence against women, torture etc and that children were actually using porn as a form of sex education!

He went on to reveal that a study by the British Board of Film Classification revealed the shocking result that 60% of 11-13 year olds had viewed porn accidentally on their devices. One of Rhidians friends has a son who was shamefully sent home from school for viewing porn. He was so traumatised by the shame of being caught and by the content that he'd accessed that his father dedicated himself to ensuring that age verification on the internet be made a legal requirement and the result will form part of the Online Safety Bill:

He ended his talk with the following quoatation from the Bible:

Love desires not it's own, ìt does not harm, it always trusts, it always protects

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016xj0

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I turned it off as i thrust the team here. I do know at one time i was under the misunderstanding that a VPN is not allowed here but that was clarified as not true.

I use a VPN when i feel that a site is not trustworthy or i feel that there are people on a forum i do not trust as they have an agender.

My m/c's and phone all have VPN set as the default setting.

Originally Posted by Itshim

My m/c's and phone all have VPN set as the default setting.

Mine too…

(SurfShark)

[RichardCoulter]

I can't see the point tbh if you're not doing anything illegal or immoral (unless you live under a dictatorship that forbids reasonable activity).

Using a VPN may actually draw attention to those who use them and there's also no guarantee that the VPN operator isn't snooping or recording things either.

[RichardCoulter]

After concerns about plans to weaken moderation, Elon Musk has been invited to appear before a Commons Select Committee regarding his intention to purchaseTwitter..

Julian Kinight, who chairs the DCMS panel, will be asking him to explain how he will be balancing his commitment to free speech with the forthcoming obligations on websites to protect users from harm under the Online Safety Bill.