Police to get tough on internet trolls.

[peanut]

I'm with Russ on this too.

I think it's a sad state of affairs. Then you get sites even like this one where you can't really say what you want. Can't mention Trump, can't mention guns. When you stand back and look at how sad things are it is quite worrying just how further it's going to go. What a bunch of snowflakes. Pathetic.

[RichardCoulter]

If nothing is done, it's our most vulnerable in society that will continue to suffer and even end up dead. This cannot be allowed to continue and it's good to see that internet sites are now to be made to behave responsibly or face the consequences of the law.

It's long overdue and the right of free speech must come secondary where it is in conflict with the rights of children, the elderly, the disabled etc to not be scammed, groomed, abused, upset etc by the minority of people who cannot behave responsibly on the internet.

The overwhelming number of people will not be affected by this initiative as it will be entirely irrelevant to them because they don't carry out the acts that's led to this becoming neccessary.

If you'd have seen some of the material that i've been shown that people with 'Protected characteristics' (and others) have been subject to, you'd understand.

---------- Post added at 16:18 ---------- Previous post was at 16:15 ----------

Originally Posted by peanut

I'm with Russ on this too.

I think it's a sad state of affairs. Then you get sites even like this one where you can't really say what you want. Can't mention Trump, can't mention guns. When you stand back and look at how sad things are it is quite worrying just how further it's going to go. What a bunch of snowflakes. Pathetic.

Take a look at the photograph of this young lady:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47127208

Do you think that she was a "pathetic snowflake"? If so, perhaps you'd like to say this to her parents.

[peanut]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If nothing is done, it's our most vulnerable in society that will continue to suffer and even end up dead. This cannot be allowed to continue and it's good to see that internet sites are now to be made to behave responsibly or face the consequences of the law.

It's long overdue and the right of free speech must come secondary where it is in conflict with the rights of children, the elderly, the disabled etc to not be scammed, groomed, abused, upset etc by the minority of people who cannot behave responsibly on the internet.

The overwhelming number of people will not be affected by this initiative as it will be entirely irrelevant to them because they don't carry out the acts that's led to this becoming neccessary.

If you'd have seen some of the material that i've been shown that people with 'Protected characteristics' (and others) have been subject to, you'd understand.

The problem I have is you must look for it. You did it with this forum asking to be treated as a special kind of person because of your illness/ disability. When things don't go your way you use it against others. It's like going on a site and saying please don't pick on me because I can't take it and I'll get offended. Well what do you think will happen? And when it does you seem to be in your element.

For the record, I'm disabled and I have suffer with mental health. Yet I'm no different to anyone else apart from you special kind of easily offended types that is.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Take a look at the photograph of this young lady:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47127208

Do you think that she was a "pathetic snowflake"? If so, perhaps you'd like to say this to her parents.

You can't stop stupid nor can you stop social media. If you wrap people up in cotton wool too much then they've got no chance.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by peanut

The problem I have is you must look for it. You did it with this forum asking to be treated as a special kind of person because of your illness/ disability. When things don't go your way you use it against others. It's like going on a site and saying please don't pick on me because I can't take it and I'll get offended. Well what do you think will happen? And when it does you seem to be in your element.

For the record, I'm disabled and I have suffer with mental health. Yet I'm no different to anyone else apart from you special kind of easily offended types that is.

Those that do this sort of thing will often deliberately look for people that they consider as weak, be it due to age, disability, mental llness/disability etc.

It isn't appropriate to start making this topic personal, however, your allegations are refuted. I have never asked to be treated as a "special kind of person" by any individual or organisation, merely that the law that a persons disability must be taken into consideration and that 'reasonable adjustments' should be made when appropriate.

If the law is not complied with and informal efforts to resolve matters prove to be fruitless (this is both sensible and a requirement of the courts), then legal action becomes the only option open to remedy matters.

In the vast majority if cases, it's down to thoughtlessness as opposed to malice. When people realise that they have upset somebody, they are horrified and amend their behaviour.

The rest (an even further minority) are subject to legal action in the hope that it will lead to an adjustment to their attitude. The cases where I have taken matters to court have either been settled (sometimes just before the hearing) or I have won. A proportion of the money received has been given to charity, for example, £3,500 was made available to CF members and an amount offered to help with the running costs of the site itself. The money isn't important to me as i'm lucky enough to be financially comfortable, it's changing attitudes towards the disabled that is the primary motivator.

If someone chooses to disclose their disability, often for practical reasons, and this is used like a red flag to a bull to certain individuals, then this new legislation will be a perfect solution.

Suggesting that those who defend themselves against abuse and innapropriate comments are "in their element" when they do so is a pretty dumb thing to say. Nobody would deliberately choose discord over harmony.

I accept that you may not want to use this new legislation if you start to suffer from harrassment, abuse etc (I suspect you haven't); you won't be compelled to use it if that is your decision.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If you'd have seen some of the material that i've been shown that people with 'Protected characteristics' (and others) have been subject to, you'd understand.

I have. And I grew a pair instead of bleating “you’re only doing/saying that because I’m disabled”.

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:51 ----------

Originally Posted by peanut

The problem I have is you must look for it. You did it with this forum asking to be treated as a special kind of person because of your illness/ disability. When things don't go your way you use it against others. It's like going on a site and saying please don't pick on me because I can't take it and I'll get offended. Well what do you think will happen? And when it does you seem to be in your element.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Russ

I have. And I grew a pair instead of bleating “you’re only doing/saying that because I’m disabled”.

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:51 ----------

Good for you, meanwhile others have ended up committing suicide, started self harming, developed mental health problems etc.

Everything isn't all about you Russ.

[Russ]

Pot, meet kettle.

[peanut]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Good for you, meanwhile others have ended up committing suicide, started self harming, developed mental health problems etc.

Everything isn't all about you Russ.

It would be far easier to remove someone like you from a site than to pander around you in fear of offending you in some way.

And likewise in the real world, all you are doing is isolating yourself, making a rod for your own back. I certainly wouldn't want to be associated with someone like you in real life as you're too much of a liability. You're not doing yourself any favours even when you think you're doing the right thing.

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Those that do this sort of thing will often deliberately look for people that they consider as weak, be it due to age, disability, mental llness/disability etc.

It isn't appropriate to start making this topic personal, however, your allegations are refuted. I have never asked to be treated as a "special kind of person" by any individual or organisation, merely that the law that a persons disability must be taken into consideration and that 'reasonable adjustments' should be made when appropriate.

If the law is not complied with and informal efforts to resolve matters prove to be fruitless (this is both sensible and a requirement of the courts), then legal action becomes the only option open to remedy matters.

In the vast majority if cases, it's down to thoughtlessness as opposed to malice. When people realise that they have upset somebody, they are horrified and amend their behaviour.

The rest (an even further minority) are subject to legal action in the hope that it will lead to an adjustment to their attitude. The cases where I have taken matters to court have either been settled (sometimes just before the hearing) or I have won. A proportion of the money received has been given to charity, for example, £3,500 was made available to CF members and an amount offered to help with the running costs of the site itself. The money isn't important to me as i'm lucky enough to be financially comfortable, it's changing attitudes towards the disabled that is the primary motivator.

If someone chooses to disclose their disability, often for practical reasons, and this is used like a red flag to a bull to certain individuals, then this new legislation will be a perfect solution.

Suggesting that those who defend themselves against abuse and innapropriate comments are "in their element" when they do so is a pretty dumb thing to say. Nobody would deliberately choose discord over harmony.

I accept that you may not want to use this new legislation if you start to suffer from harrassment, abuse etc (I suspect you haven't); you won't be compelled to use it if that is your decision.

I asked this a while back on this thread and it was just ignored. What happens when someone accuses you of something you've not actually done and then when asked for evidence were it was stated it was available would not be sent. How would one protect themselves against that? It's not just the vulnerable that need protecting. Anyone can suffer at the hands of others.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by peanut

It would be far easier to remove someone like you from a site than to pander around you in fear of offending you in some way.

And likewise in the real world, all you are doing is isolating yourself, making a rod for your own back. I certainly wouldn't want to be associated with someone like you in real life as you're too much of a liability. You're not doing yourself any favours even when you think you're doing the right thing.

A pub landlord barred a disabled and facially disfigured customer because he was fed up of him complaining about the remarks of other customers; legal action ensued.

You again have nothing to offer the thread but personal and negative rudeness, so i'm bringing our discussion to a close.

---------- Post added at 17:57 ---------- Previous post was at 17:56 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

Pot, meet kettle.

I (and others) have fought long and hard for this legislation; it is not borne soley out of self interest.

[Russ]

Sounds like you’re admitting self interest to be at least part of your motivation. “Interesting”.

[peanut]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

A pub landlord barred a disabled and facially disfigured customer because he was fed up of him complaining about the remarks of other customers; legal action ensued.

You again have nothing to offer the thread but personal and negative rudeness, so i'm bringing our discussion to a close.[COLOR="Silver"]

Sorry I'm not being rude to you at all. But if you can't handle a discussion then feel free to walk away from it.

As for the pub user. Yeah I have some empathy for the person. But such is life. Did you think the landlord should have barred all his regulars instead? Or take the easy route and take the cause of the problem out of the equation. What is right or wrong and who's to say what is right or wrong.

It's people like you that do give people that need help a bad name. You don't quite grasp reality because you're wound up in your crusade.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Mythica

I asked this a while back on this thread and it was just ignored. What happens when someone accuses you of something you've not actually done and then when asked for evidence were it was stated it was available would not be sent. How would one protect themselves against that? It's not just the vulnerable that need protecting. Anyone can suffer at the hands of others.

It was ignored because this matter was resolved last August; if you still have an issue with this, I suggest that you contact Mick.

I do agree that anyone can suffer at the hands of others (and there are remedies open to those that do), but, it is more likely and is more problematic for the vulnerable in society.

---------- Post added at 18:04 ---------- Previous post was at 18:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

Sounds like you’re admitting self interest to be at least part of your motivation. “Interesting”.

Of course it is, I am severely disabled and have suffered from harrassment etc.

---------- Post added at 18:10 ---------- Previous post was at 18:04 ----------

Originally Posted by peanut

Sorry I'm not being rude to you at all. But if you can't handle a discussion then feel free to walk away from it.

As for the pub user. Yeah I have some empathy for the person. But such is life. Did you think the landlord should have barred all his regulars instead? Or take the easy route and take the cause of the problem out of the equation. What is right or wrong and who's to say what is right or wrong.

It's people like you that do give people that need help a bad name. You don't quite grasp reality because you're wound up in your crusade.

Parliament is the place that decides what is right and wrong and legislates accordingly.

If a black man is subject to racist comments, should an establishment get rid of him if he complains?

It is myself and many others who have ensured that, going forward, people will have formal redress should they experience issues on the internet. It's going to happen whether you like it or not.

[peanut]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

It is myself and many others who have ensured that, going forward, people will have formal redress should they experience issues on the internet. It's going to happen whether you like it or not.

You're making things go backwards for everyone else. But you don't see that do you.

[Russ]

So could it be that your disability clouds your judgment and means you (incorrectly) assume that any criticism aimed at you is purely because you have said disability?