Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:trolling vs free speech (Score 1) 898

> There are issues of free speech here.

????

Don't confuse free speech with hate speech. I'm as big proponent of free speech and freedom of expression (be it verbal, written, etc) as the next guy, but I'm pretty hard on cowards who hide behind the faceless anonymity of the internet to spout awful hatred. This is emotional bullying and just because it's impersonal (as opposed to physical) doesn't make it any less damaging and devastating to a person. As it has been shown lately, bullying (or hate speech) can and will sometimes destroy a person psychologically and lead some people to suicide at worst, or great anguish at best. And don't give me none of that crap that the target of this particular bully is already dead and thus beyond any real harm.

People should be responsible for their deeds *and* their words, regardless of technology used. Desirable behavior should be rewarded, while an undesirable one should be punished so it doesn't repeat. It's called raising a child. Looks like someone didn't do a particularly good job at raising this "child".

Spam

Submission + - Holding Companies advertised responsible for spam

lunatick writes: "I have been getting a ton of spam on my forums. Despite e-mail activation, image text input, auto-banning anyone that trys to input a webpage I get an average of 20 new sign ups a day and 2 actually activate and post Spam. I added a $1000 per day advertisement fee for the forums as a TOS, but how do i enforce this. I tried billing 1 company and was slapped with a harassment threat. I obtained the address through a whois lookup. Does anyone in the /. community know of any legal president for holding the advertised companies/websites liable for the spam of the advertising companies they hire?"

Slashdot Top Deals

The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.

Working...