Arizona Nuking Trolls by Making "Annoying" Comments Illegal

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

ringzero

Distinguished
Dec 7, 2011
24
0
18,560
[citation][nom]lamorpa[/nom]"If this bill pass"????Come on. It's the first phrase of the first sentence. What, did the proof reader stop at the third word?[/citation]

I've noticed the grammatical integrity of Toms articles is going down the crapper. I kind of question whether they even have proofreaders.

I do not live in Arizona.
 

nekoangel

Distinguished
Sep 27, 2009
18
0
18,560
The once mighty ban hammers of many websites have turned into limp noodles when it comes towards their actions against trolling and harassment. Even Blizzards own Community Managers have bashed customers and further fueled a flame war.

I am not surprised that such laws are being made and they show how little law makers know how to deal with the digital information age we live in now. Seeing the talk of free speech it makes me wonder about those who harass others and tell them their opinions dont matter and they should not speak. There is trolling to be disruptive and then there is trolling to prevent others from exercising their right to free speech.
 

xxsk8er101xx

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
108
0
18,630
Won't survive the constitution test. First Amendment is clearly stated and the supreme court already stated the internet is protected by free speech.
 

svdb

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2009
93
0
18,580
Companies and individual owners of web sites already have the discreet power to ban whoever doesn't comply with their site's code of conduct. There is no need for a specific law. The only thing laws like this one allow is finer control over censorship by your government. If this law passes, you will not be able to criticize your government or complain about it anymore. It's not a question of freedom of speech anymore, it's a question of abuse of power.
Not so long ago someone said "if this was a dictatorship, this would be a hell of a lot easier..." Remember? Unfortunately the Arizona legislator takes that literally...
 

livebriand

Distinguished
Apr 18, 2011
282
0
18,930
A few issues with this - for one, how will they figure out who someone online is? Second, what if the person is just being a pain in the ass, not giving personal attacks? Sure, if they're stalking or something, they should be in trouble, but otherwise, this is a load of bullshit.
 

JohnnyLucky

Distinguished
May 30, 2007
990
0
18,930
Here is a link to a televsion news report published this morning by a station in Florida:

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/clermont-man-arrested-stalking-while-bond/nMKNF/

It is an example of "cyberstalking" which is the type of behavior the Arizona law was trying to make illegal.

 

svdb

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2009
93
0
18,580
[citation][nom]john_4[/nom]And who decides what crosses the line of annoying? This is Fascism/Marxism at work.[/citation]
Now that's funny you say that. Fascism and Marxism are two very different things and yet you mix them together as if they were synonyms. I think what you meant is despotism. It'd be funny to see Republican Rep. Tim Vogt's face when you call him a "Marxist". :)
 

svdb

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2009
93
0
18,580
On the bright side of things, with this bill you could drag Tim Vogt into court simply for having "annoyed" you. I'm sure you can think of a good reason. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.