Police to get tough on internet trolls.

[Russ]

Yep, even sounds like bullying. But you know what? I just suck it up.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Russ

So run it by me, how has my Aspergers caused issues for me becoming a senior Paralegal for a well-known Law firm where I have over 250 current clients and deal with Judges, QCs, Barristers and medical experts on a daily basis, as well as leaving my files open to scrutiny at any time by the SLA?

And maybe while you’re at it could you explain why nobody who actually knows or has met me has ever said anything similar about my Aspergers? Let me guess, maybe they’re too “frightened” to say anything?

---------- Post added at 18:47 ---------- Previous post was at 18:44 ----------

And again, Hell would freeze over before I accept any “help” or “advice” from you.

Because people with Aspergers aren't unintelligent, they are usually, at worst, of average intelligence and, at best, more intelligent than the general population- it's the lack of social skills that's the main problem.

I can see that you're becoming upset, so let's leave it there. Take care

[pip08456]

I don't see Russ getting upset.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Mythica

So what about the 'normal' person I mentioned?

---------- Post added at 18:06 ---------- Previous post was at 18:02 ----------



Have you really just told someone they are in denial about their disabilities? Wow, that's a new low, even for you.

Using the term 'normal' for a non disabled person suggests that you view disabled people as 'abnormal'. Interesting.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by pip08456

I don't see Russ getting upset.

He's not capable of upsetting Russ but when you're in a big hole it's best to stop digging, the way out isn't digging more

---------- Post added at 18:22 ---------- Previous post was at 18:19 ----------

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Using the term 'normal' for a non disabled person suggests that you view disabled people as 'abnormal'. Interesting.

Or that they are different from the norm rather than abnormal, it's easy to find offence everywhere if you look hard enough and the look even harder till you spot it

[Russ]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Because people with Aspergers aren't unintelligent, they are usually, at worst, of average intelligence and, at best, more intelligent than the general population- it's the lack of social skills that's the main problem.

I can see that you're becoming upset, so let's leave it there. Take care

No no, you don’t get away that easily. If I have problems with social skills how am I able to converse with these highly influential and intelligent people on a daily basis? A very common route in Legal process is winning people over to your side of the argument - it’s how we win cases. So please do tell me, I’m itching to know your expert opinion about this.

Honestly, there’s no shaming in saying “Sorry, I was wrong”.

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Using the term 'normal' for a non disabled person suggests that you view disabled people as 'abnormal'. Interesting.

No it really doesn't Richard. But I guess you don't want to answer the question.

Any chance we can stick to the topic, stop it with the provocative character assassination tones or this thread will close.

[RichardCoulter]

The Digital, Media, Culture and Sport committee has today accused facebook of deliberately and intentionally violated privacy & anti competition laws:

https://www.parliament.uk/business/c...blished-17-19/

Amongst other things eg fake news, they have called for a compulsory code of ethics overseen by a regulator and for websites to be obliged to take down 'harmful' content. They also want the regulator to be given legal powers to take action against those in breach of the code.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

they have called for a compulsory code of ethics overseen by a regulator and for websites to be obliged to take down 'harmful' content. They also want the regulator to be given legal powers to take action against those in breach of the code.

"harmful" as decided by who exactly ?

Just another colossal waste of money to create a huge bureaucracy that will not really achieve anything useful.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Paul M

"harmful" as decided by who exactly ?

Just another colossal waste of money to create a huge bureaucracy that will not really achieve anything useful.

It'll be things like bullying/trolling, guides to help people make bombs, commit suicide etc. Also, scamming and grooming by paedophiles. The issue seems to be that some sites are taking too long to take things down (if at all). I assume the exact details will be thrashed out by the Government and the regulator.

Why don't you think it'll achieve anything Paul? Even if it only covers the 10% of the internet available to most people, I think it will have a massive impact.