Slashdot Mirror
Death Threats In the Blogosphere
Several readers have written in about the death threats and threats of sexual harm that have been directed at tech blogger Kathy Sierra. She is the author of a number of books about Java and a popular speaker at conferences. She has now stopped blogging and cancelled her appearance at eTech. She names the names of four prominent bloggers who are backers of two sites on which the threats were posted. Others in the blogosphere like Robert Scoble and Tim Bray have posted publicly in support of Sierra. Scoble in particular emphasizes the streak of misogyny that is still all too evident in the tech world. The Washington Post is also grappling with the issue of vile comment posts that flirt with illegality. One commenter on Bray's post summed it up: "The Internet used to be a university. Then it became a shopping mall. But now, it's a war zone."
Sometimes you should just remain anonymous on the internet.
Head First Java and Head First EJB are two of the first HF books I'd read. Kathy Sierra is one of the co-authors of these, books in what I consider an amazing series both in its approach and its enlightenment of what can be tediously dry material. Anyone who contributes to the technical community with that credibility is a superstar. Unfortunately superstars end up in the less sane miscreants' crosshairs.
The blogs and comments posted threatening Kathy are unacceptable, and look to be very illegal. It's a pity there are those who are disturbed enough to post such garbage. Normally I shrug off the garbage I see, but I think Kathy is making rational choices, albeit drastic ones.
I hate that by Kathy's own words, she isn't the same person, she'll never be the same person. It's a crime this happens to the good guys.
For those in the slashdot community with any knowledge of who might be making these posts, it is incumbent upon you to bring forward that information. For those in the slashdot community with some sniffing/hacking skills (mine are rusty), have at it deducing who the asswipes are, find them, and report them.
I hope Kathy sees and realizes enough support from the community and can regain some semblance of self.
(Aside: I don't think the internet has become the war zone the article describes. I do think the internet has made it much easier and maybe too easy for the disturbed to wreak personal havoc on the unfortunate targets. There may be a case to be made here against anonymous non-traceable postings, but for the most part the internet community seems (so far) to be self-policing. Hopefully that holds true for Kathy, and they find the posters, and prosecute.)
In any case, if you put yourself out there in the world, cyber or otherwise, and develop a following, there is always going to be an asshole or two or three that want to harm you because they have nothing else better to do. Why do you think George W Bush has bodyguards?
I dont know about the Internet being a war zone. But I though programmers were more rational than to be making death threats on the internet.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
Yea, its a war zone,
I got a Death threat on one of my blogs Yesterday.
WTF is wrong with people. The stupid part was it was a
response to a complaint I posted about the Business
Practices of Electronic Arts Inc.
Me: EA suxxors
Them: DIE SCUM
WTH?
The blogosphere has turned into spam, flamewars, threats, and general kookery. Welcome to the new Usenet.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
People are people. People have the right to express their opinions about someone else.
So where, as far as the law is concerned, is "too much"? If it is one person's opinion that another person should be shot and raped, does that person have the right to express that opinion?
My personal opinion is that death threats and rape threats are far beyond the free speech line, simply because they infringe and threaten another person's right to life. Which, in my opinion, is a rather important right. I support her fully, and personally think that the posters of said comments need to have charges brought against them.
But to what degree do the law books say too much is too much? Where is the line as far as the books are concerned?
Just honest curiosity.
I don't like the word blogosphere either, but I'm not going to kill anyone over it.
Once upon the time the Internet had a very high barrier of entry. Now the barrier is quite low. Not only is it easy to get access, but it's easy to get quasi-anonymous access at multiple points. Gone are the days when an email to root@.??? could get an account pulled or at least result in a user getting a stern talking to. Consequently, users have need of taking defensive measures.
But as far as I can tell, there's no way to fix it. So long as there will be asshats, there will be asshats on the Internet. Eventually gated communities of various sorts will begin to flourish again as they did in the old BBS days, but those communities have their own drawbacks. For the Internet itself, there just isn't any good way to go back.
I've had members of my site become brutal and rather scary after I've had to ban them for fraudulent and other unacceptable behavior against other users. On more than a couple occasions, they have done things like dig up my phone number and make threatening phone calls. Call police in my state and make various absurd false reports. Spread insanely ridiculous things about me on the internet, email me and post to my website the most vile, disgusting, threatening things you can imagine.
But what can you do? Are you going to lock yourself in a bunker the rest of your life to keep yourself safe from mentally imbalanced teenagers and idiot, vindictive, insane adults?
I've had people flat out threaten to hunt me down and cut my head off if I didn't restore their banned accounts and I've had one post things across the web that are among the most vile and disgusting and insulting things you can claim about a person. But I'm not out there asking everyone to stick up for me or... well.. even wasting two seconds on it. People are dicks. Life is hard. A lot of people say a lot of shit and don't follow through. Either grow a spine or go away. There's no sense being a big baby about it because someone hates you. And if someone really has you fearing for your life, then do something about it besides blogging about it and trying to manipulate other people into sticking up for you.
First the internet was a tree. Then it was a painting. THen it was a mass of shitty analogies...
Le français vous intéresse?
When you can't say intellectually controversial things in public, on TV, in print, or anywhere else that repressed need eventually bubbles out from somewhere. Unfortunately, when it's on the internet and self-authored and published, the respective screening (getting beat up, losing your license, reputation flushed down the toilet) leaves and we're left with a river of hateful slime.
Like Ghostbusters 2. Only more serious. I suppose this makes this post controversial, as well.
More Twoson than Cupertino
While I respect anyone in the public limelight, I think Kathy is being a tad bit naive. As a mildly well-known member of a gaming community once upon a time, I came to realize that some people really do get their rocks off on simply making vile threats. (Yes, I know, the scale is very different, but the concept is much the same.)
Odds are very poor that many of them are serious, and in the case of the incredibly slim few that are, most of them are so functionally disturbed that they wouldn't be able to make a trip to a convention anyhow. They're too worried about the peanut butter covering their sidewalk or the time cubes floating in front of the bus station.
Part of being a celebrity on any level for any topic means accepting that you gain both fame and infamy in parts. Refusing to continue doing good because of the threat of others doing evil against you is (while perhaps the most understandable kind) simply cowardice.
I'm a schoolteacher. I *KNOW* because I'm a teacher who connects with kids, and has a knack for reaching troubled kids that my odds of being the target of an angry, weapon-holding students are *GOOD*... someday, I'm going to stare at that terrifying situation. I still teach - I know that I do good things, and I will not live in fear of evil ones.
Kathy should recognize that her acts do far more good than the risk of harm merits and go on. Courage of the unknown is a tough thing, but an important thing - it is what makes (most) of the greatest humans great.
Technological competence assures no more intelligence than any other form, just more elitism.
Yeah, back in the day you never would have seen this sort of thing on the web, assuming that by "back in the day" you mean "the time between when Tim Berners-Lee came up with the web but before he told anyone about it".
Not to say this sort of thing is all right, of course, but while this is almost certainly a sad byproduct of the culture of the internet, there's nothing in the post she pointed to that I find disturbing or even all that unusual. As she noted, you get everybody online and give them anonymity, this sort of thing happens.
This doesn't mean, however, that it's happening *more* than it would have back before the internet, just that now it tends to be visible. Public figures, even minor ones, have always run the risk of attracting sickos, especially when they're decent looking women. Going so far as to suggest this is something new that's being caused by the internet just seems ridiculous, and trying to paint it as a byproduct of the culture of men in software development is even moreso.
I know it must be disturbing to realize you're the focus of this kind of thing, but let's try not to make more of it than it is.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
I'm a big fan of Kathy Sierra; I own several of her books, and have evangelized for her for a long time.
But right now, I'm worried about mob "justice."
I've seen that, several times, "Joey" has said, "This is a big misunderstanding," and "please, let's talk about this."
The response? "We've seen all the evidence we need-- shut up, you're in big trouble."
Have they seen all the evidence they "need?" Need, for what purpose? I agree that they've seen disturbing, gruesome pictures. But is it all connected up right? I'm not so sure-- did e-mailed death threats really come from Joey & Co.?
But there is something that I'm sure of: Due process is not happening here. We're witnessing a dog pile. I'm sure that a great many of these people are hearing Kathy's story, seeing the pictures, and then calling "Get a rope."
I read the story. It's disgusting. I know how the wanna-be vigilantes feel. But this is no way to do things, and I find the popular response disgusting, as well.
If some of the people responsible are willing and ready to talk, and have a side of the story, it's everybody's duty to give it a fair hearing. We should be encouraging conversation right now, not discouraging it. I'm sure Kathy & Joey & all can have a conversation, and work this out, and make a follow-up announcement.
Just another example of John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory.
Before there were blogs there was usenet, that pristine unadulterated source of helpful ideas and good manners.
Some people just have no idea...
Deleted
I've been following this today, on and off. I feel really sorry for Kathy Sierra. What is scary is the number of bloggers (mostly female) who describe being subjected to similar things, some even worse. Most of the bloggers mentioned by her have apologized for participating in such a site though, even if, as they claim, they did not do any of the objectionable content.
I think Don Parks summed up how I feel about this best. With reality TV the tolerance of bullying has unfortunately been increased. If something good can be said to come of this, it is that a few online bullies are getting their well deserved come-uppance. I think it was Chad Fowler who wrote that the net never forgets, and building a reputation becomes ever more important. The stuff you write may come back to haunt you for a long time, and never forget that there are real people with feelings on the other side. Even if you disagree with them they deserve to be treated as human beings.
Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die
If whoever did this - at least some of them - were stupid enough to leave traceable IPs, they'll go to prison. And they deserve it. And if it is because some trolls simply didn't see that somewhere beyond the limit of decency was another limit, a legal one, they deserve to learn the hard way.
I'm angry. Not angry enough to be happy with the various means of online surveillance that law enforcement has appropriated, but angry enough to hwant to see them used, fast.
blow your mind already
For those in the slashdot community with any knowledge of who might be making these posts, it is incumbent upon you to bring forward that information.
/. to say either.
No, no it's not.
For those in the slashdot community with some sniffing/hacking skills (mine are rusty), have at it deducing who the asswipes are, find them, and report them.
Now that IS definitely illegal. I don't know that the supposed death threats are really illegal; they appear to me to be jokes, admittedly offensive, inappropriate and mean, but jokes nonetheless.
It's not for me to say, or anyone else on
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Why are these morons threatening this young woman? As to the death threats and such, yeah I've been a recipient as lately as last week, just for posting an honest opinion. The opinion was in a Chicago Tribune "Julie's Health Club" article; blog, I guess, since there is a moderated comments section. The topic was child care, I opined that one parent should stay home while one won bread. I didn't say mom should stay home, mind you, but ONE PARENT.
/., now at work and w/o my /.pw)
Of course, some crazed misandrist feminazi (I never used that word before now, but thanks to the strange woman from the internet it will become a beloved part of my vocabulary now) emailed me to say that I was a ceve man who should have his "balls cut off" before I bred.
Threatening to cut a man's balls off is worse than a death threat, as the 95% of you who are men well know.
I had death threats back when I got too popular at K5, too (yes, it's the "Paxil Diary" guy mcgrew here). That, ironically, was over a joke that some gays didn't get; one of them was an admin, Pete Jongular, who made the site so annoying for me that I left. Is the asshole still there? If not I may go back...
But anyway, my empathy goes out to this poor woman. I know how she feels, even though I'm too damned stubborn and ornery to let a few death threats and threats of castration keep me off the net.
-mcgrew (sm62704 at
Having people come round to your home, post images and sneering references to your religion does not constitute WAY oversensitive. You yourself, are a prime example of what's wrong with online forums.
.. Re:This is coming from a chick
was
davecb5620@gmail.com
The first thing I thought of when reading this was, "how are these people making the threats any different than the people issuing fatwahs against 'enemies of Islam'? I thought of a friend blogger, Anarchangel, who's had a fatwah issued against him.
His solution? Tell 'em off and make it known he's packing pistols. Over a year later and he's fine. I'd suggest she do the same, for her own safety. And don't back down, for goodness sake! That's what they're after - terroristic behavior is done to make you back down and give ground.
Apparently there are some folks out there who really don't like Java. I mean, I dislike the damn stuff myself, but I'm not crazy about it or anything...
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
"The Internet used to be a university. Then it became a shopping mall. But now, it's a war zone."
That's the truth and one of the first casualties of that war was Civility. Free speech ends at the door of death threats and threats of physical violence. That is not unique to the internet and perhaps a new and open media requires a new type of law enforcement. It doesn't have to be invasive or Constitutionally questionable. A few of the worst offenders making headlines going to trial, and a couple of the worst overseas offenders extradited here for trial, would likely be all it would take to end most of the silliness. There will always be those few, desperately in need of therapy, who push the bounds. But we do have to respond. Just like real serial killers usually start out torturing animals, real acts of violence start by giving voice to the desire.
Funny, but I see more of what I could classify as hate speech on right wing web sites. Death threats, suggestions for snipers to take out some imagined offender and many along the lines of, "Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?" And this from people counting themselves among the religious right. Shame. Tactless comment coupled with faithless religion.
Besides, why would anyone want to threaten a JAVA programmer? .NET or C++, that's understandable. But JAVA? The humanity!
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
That said, the cure for such threats was rather easy: Post the thing verbatim, along with every ounce of information you could dig up on the person. Odds were good that a sharp admin could figure out who sent it, email the ISP (back when they actually paid attention to the inbox of abuse@...), and humiliate the punk online.
Of course, back then, there were lots of advantages: it was easier to track people back then, and I'm a guy with a passion for hunting and target-shooting. I also lived in a state that had some very loose laws considering the disposition of trespassers and those who would threaten bodily harm to persons or property (Arkansas). A few simple public postings in the source's favorite newsgroups w/ all evidence, a letter to his/her ISP w/ all the evidence, and the threat-maker was gone. I had never seen anyone dumb enough to actually try for it, in spite of my (admittedly reckless habit of) publicly calling them out. Most simply went away and stayed gone. But it was a whole other Internet back then.
I suspect that OTOH a woman, who doesn't really make a hobby of pissing people off like I had, and catching crap in an Internet that has now become swamped with a cornucopia of anonymizing tools and techniques? Prolly not so easy for her to simply post and humiliate.
Props to her for posting them verbatim, though... and it's a very good start to name and shame the sources that can be found. Let the bloggers who host such stuff publicly deal with the fallout.
Though this will sound trite, I'd take such postings with a block of salt... the vast, vast majority of idiots who post such garbage don't have the nerve, transportation, or means to pull off anything that they threaten. I daresay that they're little boys who managed to squeeze off something that makes them feel big n' bad when mommy wasn't looking at their monitor.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
If those "prominent bloggers" are connected, send them off to the big house for threatening her and harassing her. Do something with the existing laws now to make a case against new laws in the future.
Quite frankly, if I caught up with someone who wrote about my wife like that and threatened her so viciously, I'd have a mind to pistol whip them until they could recite the entire series of Emily Post etiquette materials.
Often blog/forum comments are censored when the irony or shock-humor value is lost on some uptight group or individual. I blame the fucking jews, the mormons and the Jackson 5, we should gas them all. Seriously, death threats are probably some overweight geek kid sat at home in his underpants.
The WP has a different problem entirely but does freedom of speech really need to suffer? User moderation works well for some sites, rarely should it be necessary to delete a comment. In the UK PC once stood for police constable, political correctness now sees us policing each others words and thoughts. What wider effects will censoring web comments have on the use of irony and sarcasm in written language?
it's a series of tubes!
But it's definately not a big truck.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C1 bottles of beer on the wall. Take one down, pass it round... Oh, umm...
Gabe and Tyco said it best.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
If you run away, the bloggers win.
I believe this result was accurately predicted by John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory. Sad but true.
Calling the internet a "war zone" is idiotic hype. If you want to see what one actually looks like, go to Iraq, or Somalia, or any number of other low intensity conflicts around the globe. A far better metaphor would be calling the internet a playground filled with shouting, arguing children who sometimes say threatening or stupid things.
Right, but are you a public figure? Speak at Conferences? Author books? You seem to have spent enough time trivializing her situation, without giving a thought to what it might be like to receive a death threat - knowing all well that the world has easy PHYSICAL access to you.
Think about what you are saying... what good will reporting these threats to the police do? Are they going to be able to track down the bad-guys? It's doubtful.
The way I see it, you are either; a.) A Karma Whore looking for that "+1 insightful", or b.) Have way too much time on your hands, and not a whole lot of common sense. Either way, perhaps you should hang out at "Digg" where you peers are...
When did that happen? After all, the RIAA has turned them into an art form.
and you, sir, are a JACKASS.
"fuck off you boring slut... i hope someone slits your throat and cums down your gob"
/.
that is not a death threat.
Sick photoshop images are not a death threat.
Sick comment are not a death threat.
I didn't see any examples that qualified as a death threat.
Locking your self in your home will not stop jack. Go to yor conferences and schedule yourself not to be alone if you must, but your fear is what they want. Only you can give it to them.
Sexual threats are not about sex, they are about control.
Don't let them control you.
Posting AC because of the huge vigilante attitude that has grip
SO called thinking people reacting emotionally.
I guess she never heard the expression "don't feed the trolls". This is exactly the crazy overblown reaction that I am sure makes this particular troll giddy with attention happiness. He even made slashdot now.
By trolling standards, this is a complete and utter success. Trolls only want attention people, and shes played right into its hand.
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
Did you actually read the posts made about Kathy Sierra? They were pretty outrageously vicious. I can't imagine anyone saying garbage like that face to face without there being hell to pay.
Neither am I, but I know that I can't understand what it's like to maintain constant vigilence - because women can and are abused by men. They are statistically smaller and weaker than men, and easily victimized.
Ever walk to your car in a dark parking lot? When you do, do you give thought to being attacked? I don't, but almost every woman I've asked says she does. I recently heard that 10% of high school senior girls report having been raped. These are girls under 18.
I have an acquaintance who was in her work parking lot and rolled down her window to chat with a coworker who smiled pleasantly as he reached in the window to fondle her breast. This was most certainly unwelcome and abusive! Has that ever happened to you? Do you think she will *ever* consider rolling down her car window on a warm day without thinking of that event? Do you ever think "Will my coworker sexually harass me?" I doubt it.
You mock the blogger's fear as overreaction. Try thinking like a more vulnerable person, and then perhaps you'll respond more charitably.
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
>The Internet used to be a university. Then it became a shopping mall. But now, it's a war zone.
It's *ALWAYS* been a war zone. There were flame wars escalating into death threats on usenet in the '80's. My college suspended a kid for posting violent rape fantasies to email lists in 1986. The only difference is that now enough people know about the internet that stories about it sell newspapers. Anyone who thinks it used to be all nice and safe is either delusional or wasn't paying attention. If you have a forum where governments can't track down and kill political opponents, you have a forum where nice people can't track down and hold liable nogoodniks who froth hate. That sucks for the nice people, but I think our need for widespread, anonymous communication outweighs their discomfort.
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
Pampered western journalists whinging and grizzling about other people's use of free speech is not a "war". People being so cowardly that they can't function if someone threatens them is not comparable to being carpet bombed because you happened to be born in the wrong place or have the wrong religion.
Win the "war on terrorism"; stop being afraid!
People are such cowards these days. It's NAUSEATING.
But I though programmers were more rational than to be making death threats on the internet.
Millions upon millions of people use the Internet. Statistically speaking, there simply must be some dangerous or otherwise crazy people using it.
Also, remember the diversity of age groups that use the Internet. The apparent immaturity of the people who posted these threats may be due, in part, to actual physical immaturity. They may just be kids who don't realize the full significance of their actions.
It is a shame that it happened, but this sort of thing is bound to happen sooner or later. That doesn't make it ok, but it does make it a practical reality of our day. I think that she may have overreacted a bit. Taking legal measures against these posters may be warranted, but living in a state of fear as a result of a few thoughtless posts on the Internet is not.
That's what I think.
http://www.country-studies.com/indonesia/the-java- war-and-cultivation-system.html
Man, some people can hold a grudge for a long time.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Oh you beat me to it... the issue is serious, but at the same time... there are so many jokes.
You fail to realise - if I'm posting here because I've got too much time, then what are you doing responding? How can I be attention-seeking, if I am anonymous (like now). This tech writer real name Kathy IS attention seeking. FACT. She can't handle life in the spotlight. FACT. She can't handle hecklers/scorn. FACT. Because the experience "changed" her so much she considers herself a "different person", she loozes and she got pwned. FACT (sad but true). She is not entitled to my sympathy or anyone else's. FACT.
You've got nothing on me because I'm anonymous here. FACT. You're a deluded sucker who sees a "damsel in distress". FACT. Wouldn't want to be you mister looza in shining armour. FACT.
No, it really wasn't. Kathy Sierra is one of the kindest, most decent, and most intelligent people I've ever met. No matter how funny you think your comment was, it was insensitive and rude and trivializes a person I know and respect.
Even if I didn't know her, it would still have been incredibly rude. No one deserves that.
how to invest, a novice's guide
Troll. Fucking troll who deserves to be shot. In fact Mr Prager, I think I might come on down to New York and do it for you. Is 202-224-4451 still your number so I can work out when you are free? Arsehole.
This exact behavior occurs on highways, parking lots, and all kinds of public places every day. In fact, on highways it regularly culminates in an actual fatality. I think people think they have some sort of anonymity because they are behind glass, even though that is an utter illusion. You're more anonymous on foot, but people rarely scream at each other over how they walk. I think there is something about being face-to-face that causes most people to be more polite. I see screaming fits, fists, and middle fingers on the roads every day. I see obscenity-laced illiterate rants everywhere on the internet. I don't see this in person, face-to-face most days, at least not yet.
Man, you really need that seminar!
Reduce, reuse, cycle
Making threats to kill is illegal in the UK. I must be getting old, because I'm going to say that the police should take such offences more seriously, and yes that should include calling the ISP to connect IPs to human beings.
Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
First of all, yes, I am female. I read /. Popular wisdom be damned.
/.'ers know about women... but we knew that.
I've had things said about me anonymously on the web that would NEVER be said to me face to face. The anonymity of the web gives people the feeling that they can insult and threaten and never face any consequences for their actions. Knowing this, I take all online threats and insults with a grain of salt and consider the source. It's someone who is putting down someone else to feel better about themselves. Fine, go for it. Post away.
It's when they take it offline. If someone managed to figure out who posted this and used the snail mail to threaten me or figured out a phone number and called me, THEN I take offense. If that same someone managed to post contact information online and said 'go find her and do something', I don't get mad. I get even. And I get the police involved.
If they're lucky, they won't end up in a small cell with a very large man named Bubba who hasn't seen a woman in years. I'll just take away everything they own in a civil suit.
But that's me. I've heard just about everything said about me. Different people react in different ways, and I understand the reason she reacted the way she did. Judging her by saying 'she's a woman, she'll react this way' is peurile and generally shows how much
... of course, are the bloggers who let themselves be conduits for abusive speech. This thread is now over 100 posts and I've seen almost nothing on this. C'mon, all you messaging admins, everyone who has to answer abuse@domain mail... what is their culpability?
#!
Actually I think that programmers are more likely to go off the deep end over the trivial. Perhaps it has something to do with the obsessiveness that's generally more prevalent in geek communities. I point you to what is one of the lamest provocations for a death threat: breaking the XCOPY command http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/06/ 03/147583.aspx.
Java Ranch was one of my first resources for learning Java and one of the catalysts for getting me into IT. The site is a great example of how to write technical docs with humor and entertainment value. The article "How my dog taught me polymorphism" (or something like that) still makes me smile. I think the threats are more indicative of the general hostility/sexism directed at a lot of women in IT.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
He was mocking the kind of idiots that post that crap. Look at the spelling and casing.
It was not pointed to your friend at all.
It is that same attitude that got a Family Guy episode banned.
Peter is an idiot, and on while learning judaism he says some very stupid thing. IN the context of the show, he is stupid every other character chastises him for it. It is a show that basically makes fun of people who say stupid things about Jews.
But because someone can't understand CONTEXT, it will never see the airwaves. At least it is in the collection.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Better than being famous for being a whingebag, madam.
There may be a case to be made here against anonymous non-traceable postings, but for the most part the internet community seems (so far) to be self-policing.
I've found that any kind of online discussion only remains civil as long as it's either moderated or requires accountability from the participants (i.e. not anonymous). When you allow unmoderated, anonymous discussions, no matter how noble your intentions, they degenerate.
(For an example of this principle in action, browse Slashdot at +4 threaded or nested, then switch to -1 flat.)
Your fantasies contain the seeds of important concepts.
It's *amazing* how well the media has turned so many people into hateful bots. No, before you post...this isn't a matter of ideas, it's a matter of programming. To wit:
1. The unreasonable hatred of Carl Rove and Donald Rumsfeld: these people have never killed anyone, never escaped from a wreck and hid it, have never set anyone or anything on fire, there's no reason for the typical college student to hate them with the kind of anger that kills...yet they do. Ask one: they'll say "he's not for America" and "He's an evil man!" yet they have not one instance for their hatred.
2. The bogus mindset that world peace isn't worth even one military life. In Vietnam men were shooting themselves in the leg to go home; Kerry could have been one of those. In Iraq they're voluntarily signing up for repeat tours. While the million-plus members of the military lost a typical 1023 men in 2002 (before the war) from suicides, drug overdoses and various other reasons, a mere 800 in a war is "horrific" and "disasterous". Never mind the 600 dead bodies returning home each week from Vietnam.
There are dozens of ideals like this, each with no validity, are being foisted onto the barely-paying-attention youth, and making them crazy. They'll even claim to be "moderate" or "independent" and "never watch CNN" while spewing the exact same headlines posted there.
Something's up. This isn't normal. What would suspend these people's autonomy just to change results of the election?
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
I haven't read the totality of the threats, but what was said to her that makes it a specific threat to women? "Slut"? I'd like you to meet my friend Ty (a man). Was there something specific to women, or did you assume so without really giving it the correct amount of thought.
I find it amusing that many of the bloggers seem to think this is something novel. I used to post to Bulletin Board Systems (BBS) in the 1980s, and yeah, death threats and (especially) crude sexual comments were pretty common. Of course this should not come as a shock to anyone because these were KIDS posting. Y'know, 13-year old boys? This woman is facing childish pranks and getting a little too worked up over it. The postings were on a site called, of all things, "meankids".
You want threats, go post over on FreeRepublic. After about a week of posting people managed to track me down and started putting up pictures of the front of my house, accompanied by threats and accusations of terrorism. THAT'S when you should start getting a little worried.
"The Internet used to be a university. Then it became a shopping mall. But now, it's a war zone."
The Internet used to be populated by university students; that didn't make it "a university" any more than a frat party is "a university". Even 20 years ago, the Internet had big security holes, porn, death threats, flame wars, and all the other stuff that people get so upset about today. There was just less of it, there were fewer users who cared, and the legal system just didn't care.
I think we should kill anyone that uses the term "Blogoshpere."
Is buying a Harley Davidson as your first motorcycle since you were 16 at age 49 a midlife crisis issue?
In response to vile, arguably illegal threats in cyberspace, the object of those threats has written:
Yes, the threats were vile and intended to cause emotional distress. The seriousness of them and the capacity of the posters to act in accordance with their stated intentions is very much in question. But EVEN IF THE THREATS ARE REAL, meaning, even if the posters really would kill her given the chance, her reaction is excessive. Way excessive.
You must live your life. Despite the wackos, you must live your life. Sticking your head in the sand solves nothing.
I've had jobs that put me in conflict with people rather severely. On two occasions, I've been assigned a personal bodyguard for a period of weeks until the person trying to kill me was caught and jailed. I've been chased on foot by a drug-addled cowboy who continually screamed that he was going to kill me. I've been chased in my vehicle twice, once by someone who tried to run me off the road and once by someone who was trying to follow me to my destination to do me violence. Hell, I've had a shotgun unloaded at me (from an excessive distance by a drunk with lousy aim, thank God).
I didn't stop living my life. After each of those events (and sometimes during) I walked out my front door and went to work just like normal. I can't imagine someone being so weak of spirit that they would do otherwise.
OK, go ahead and scream at me that I'm blaming the victim. I'm not. For the short term, recoiling in horror from a threat is reasonable. For the short term, only until the threat can be assessed fully, it's a reasonable reaction. But if this lady remains afraid to leave her yard next week, she's got far bigger problems than a few weirdos who might or might not pose a threat to her.
Seriously.
I have heard plenty of women, including victims taking strength back, say similar to the above post.
It should also be noted that males are the victims of violence too, by both males and females (though police still tend to laugh in the face of female->male abuse victims so they are kinda underreported). Rates of males being victims are still higher the female so in some ways males are more at risk (granted when it comes to sexual assaults, female rates are MUCH higher, same with harassment rates, though I have known males who were sexually harassed in the workplace).
And while the previous poster was probably a bit more mocking then could be called for, I am seeing a disturbing amount of 'if you are not riding to this women's defense like a good white knight they you are insensitive!' group think. Which in some ways does more damage to the treatment of women in tech then the harassment. Just another way of looking down on them, treating them as 'lessers' that need protection and sympathy because the poor dears can not take care of themselves and need nice big strong men to protect them from the evil nasty other men.....
Did the blogger overreact? Hard to say. She felt threatened enough that she does not feel safe outside her home. However, if these types of comments are really that common within this community (I have never heard of any of these sites so I can't comment there) and most who receive such slander do not react that way, then it would, by community standards, be an overreaction. It isn't a case of 'thicker skin' but of weighing the realities of risk.
And finally, the statistics bit is a bit of a slippery slope. Ok, women are, statistically, smaller then males. But the same thing could be said of, say, black males to white males. So does that male white males easily victimized and they should feel constantly threatened and vigilant?
As for your acquaintance... each person must cope their own way with trauma, but that really does not sound like a healthy reaction. If she is thinking about that event every time she rolls down her window that is obsessing on a mental injury and is a class of coping that usually does some long term harm. While understandable, dwelling on an assault is NOT a solution...
*awaits the -1 flaimbait*
You know not of what you meow, unless you know the 'nose. That is all. ;)
Is it just me or some people have way too much time in their hands to read and respond to blogs.
//whew, that was a good vent, thanks for reading
Also, why in the heck ppl expect us to know "prominent bloggers" ? Are you kidding? I can barely know my local politician and the girl on American Idol, you think I am keeping track of some wanna be attention whore posting random stuff on the net?
These death threats and insults are definitely mean and insenitive and although I'm not sure I'd have the same emotional response as Kathy she's entitled to feel scared I guess.
She'll probably turn this into a good thing though. I mean... bloggers, even good ones, are a dime-a-dozen these days. How many people had actually heard of, or were interested in following the details of the eTech conference? Now, by backing out, and discussing her situation she has expanded her fanbase and reach and will have a platform to discuss ethics and behavior in the "blogosphere". She will most likely have an opportunity to do television interviews, podcasts, guest blogs, articles, conferences, etc... playing her cards right and this could work out very well for her.
You don't have to be a vulnerable person to be a victim of crime. Anybody who receives death threats or threats of bodily harm has a right to take them seriously. I myself have received threats over the Internet that included very specific information about what I looked like and mentioned real-world places I was likely to frequent. I was within inches of notifying the authorities before a friend finally owned up that it was a practical joke. It wasn't a funny joke.
Awful things do happen in this world. A lot of them seem inexplicable to normal, rational people. Why would an audience member at a concert by the heavy metal band Damageplan choose to get up on stage and murder the guitar player of the band? It makes no sense. But when people are dealing with "celebrities," they sometimes get funny ideas in their heads about what is acceptable behavior and what is not. Some people think it's acceptable to post threatening, misogynist messages to forums. Others feel justified in crossing the line even further. Who are you or I to say someone is "vulnerable" just because they don't take their personal safety for granted?
Breakfast served all day!
I suggest "nerd rage."
http://twitter.com/OLDTELEGRAM
http://crazy.codetroop.com/randimg/imgs/computer_b omb.jpg
Yes, that language is disturbing, and the guy may even mean it. But what's the point of debating whether it is "acceptable"? If we made these kinds of people shut up, they'd still harbor the same thoughts and still be dangerous. The only difference would be that they'd be even harder to catch because there is no public record.
For any of us, there are people around who might do us harm. That's just a fact of life, and we can't change that by limiting speech. Either you face that, or you have to construct your life to be anonymous. People make both choices. Sierra has chosen a public life, and that puts her at greater risk, but it also has a lot of benefits.
I think the current lines are pretty well drawn in the US: if people defame you, you can sue and have them correct it. If people make clear, specific, immediate threats, you can get protection. If people make non-specific threats, however, there is little that you can do, and that's because restraining those people wouldn't help much, but putting restraints on that kind of speech might be abused by people who want to silence legitimate speech. In different words, much as I sympathize, "I felt threatened" shouldn't be sufficient to restrain speech.
Juvenile vitriolic statements like these aren't death threats. They're just noise. Merely wishing someone dead isn't a death threat, and I seriously doubt Ms. Sierra's claim that the law treats such wishes as such.
And her absolute shock at seeing vitriolic statements on a blog run by someone calling himself "Rageboy", or on one called "meankids.org", comes off as pretty silly. What'd you expect, calm and reasoned adult discussion?
I have seen a lot of posts that boil down to acceptance just because it has happened before and will continue to happen. Sure, a lot of people have probably received some "unsavory" communications in past relating to something posted on USENET, a blog, or message board, but that doesn't make it right. The dissappointing thing that I find about a lot of message boards et. al. on the Internet is how terribly low the standard of discussion is. I won't claim that I've never used "colorful language", but I tend to do it in appropiate situations, around those known to me and I to them.
Why do we have to accept that people will result to lower forms of abuse rather than tactful, eloquent debate? The idea behind giving people free speach is that they will use it wisely, not that they will shout obscenities on a sidewalk. You wouldn't accept your neighbor shouting obscenties in the hallway, and you shouldn't accept it on a blog comment either.
While I don't fault her for being concerned, I can't help but wonder if there is anyone out there who regularly participates in discussion groups or USENET that HASN'T been threatened by some idiot. Heck, I was getting death threats from people on the DIABLO boards years ago because (to my eternal embarassment) I took a sort of sick pleasure in pointing out when people were being stupid. Sure, I was kind of rude, but it always made me chuckle when some other anonymous geek would threaten to beat me up because of my posts. Yeah, like I was going to show up behind the Quickie mart for a "rumble". Sheesh.
Life needs more saving throws.
This, comment #18504355, is the kind of thing that makes me glad I am not an ISP.
It is the kind of thing police at all levels should investigate.
It is the kind of thing that makes ISPs need to keep records of who connected to what when. Ugh. Record-keeping.
Amazing that a discussion which began on such a low note could somehow become even lower, deep into the violently stupid.
I really hope whoever posted #...355 gets a visit from some very serious people.
. . . and threats are quite another. Intellectual censorship is a stupid and horrible thing, but it's appalling that these bloggers would allow and even encourage this kind of behavior, especially directed at a fellow blogger. Given that she apparently can't look to them for support, it's no surprise she's attempting to retire from public life.
My RSS reader has been lighting up with posts about this, and I was thinking threatening emails or phone calls with people saying specifically they were going to kill this chick. Maybe throwing in some personal details that show that the person isn't just a random bored 14 year old fucking with her. You know, stuff that normal people would consider actually calling the cops over. Finally, I read her post and it's nothing like that.
Look, it's the internet. If people haven't said they'd like to see you dead, or made some kind of artist's rendering of your demise, you just haven't been around long enough.
Is it cool? No. Is it worth "alerting teh internets", calling the cops, and being afraid to leave your yard? Fuck no. This almost reeks of publicity stunt, but I don't know anything about her, so I couldn't say for sure.
If this is what happens when a couple of bloggers (who apparently she doesn't like either) screw with her a little, I wonder what would happen if 4chan got ahold of her for some laughs? I'm sorry, but if you can't handle that stuff, you need to get off the net.
With as many people online as there are, some of them are bound to be assholes. If you can't square with that, you should stick to meatspace.
Game... blouses.
Some psychiatrists estimate that 5-10% of the male population are sociopaths (about 2% for females). The Internet puts a lower bar for comments in general. That factor combined with the perception of anonymity makes those sociopaths more willing to come out of the closet, so to speak.
It's a real problem, but you can't really just arrest 5% of the male population, right? Suppressing comments or removing anonymity is like throwing the baby away with the bath water. I don't think we should give up anonymity, and I don't agree we should stop blogging.
I think we just need to speak out when it happens, and call the police whenever the bad behavior escalates to death threats. If IP addresses are enough for the RIAA to use against file sharers, it should be enough to go after the sociopaths.
I'm sorry for what happened to this particular blogger, but I wish she wouldn't just retract from public life. Be brave, Kathy. Don't give in to fear.
Have dem der keyboard warriors brought up on assault charges. Bet they'll shut up quick.
For some reason I refuse to use either spell check or the spacebar properly.
People don't seem to understand that Javascript is by definition the programming language of hatred. When SUN initially developed it, their objective was and I quote 'To make a programming language that is by definition the programming language of hate'. Have you ever actually sat down and read one of those Java books? It's disgusting. The internet would be a lot better off if Java never existed.
I don't own a snook, and if I did I wouldn't leave it cocked.
007: "Who are you?"
Pussy: "My name is Pussy Galore."
007: "I must be dreaming..."
I knew Microsoft's viral marketing bloggers/wiki editors were going way out of their way trying to hype Vista and the 360, but this is rediculous! You can't kill Java by killing those that write books about it... can you?
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
gets a swift kick in the nuts. Or a roundhouse kick to the face.
Well, they deserve one anyway.
THE MAGIC WORDS ARE SQUEAMISH OSSIFRAGE
I can relate to Kathy's situation. While I didn't receive death threats, I did receive a LOT of hostile emails. A little over 15 years ago I wrote an article for Computerworld, comparing Windows 95 versus OS/2. In my review, I gave Win 95 a half star lead over OS/2 due to compatibility issues with existing software products. (Yep, that was me!) The day after the article came out, I had over 900 emails in my inbox. Most were from irate OS/2 advocates who questioned my manhood, called me every name in the book, threatened to take me to court, etc.
Needless to say, after a couple thousand emails, with only a couple praising my article, I was a bit shook. That was the last article I wrote for CW.
However, none of the threats came through. And I'm writing again.
It IS scarry. When death threats or physical harm is threatened, then yes, the police/fbi should get involved. It is unfortunate that when someone is in the public eye, that a few individuals can ruin a good thing. The Java community has benefited greatly from Kathy's contributions. It's sad that we will not benefit from her knowledge and skill for quite some time, due to these events.
TheTiminator
If you don't think these comments and many of the others are misogynistic, you need to examine your own attitudes.
I'll go and study the history some more -_-;; ,_,
Sorry to be noobish
*study study*
someone had a nice quote that "bloggers are a dime a dozen", somewhat like java programmers.
concealed weapons permit, a .380 and time on the range.
take your life back and quit yer bitchin, lady.
Scoble is a fucking tool
I was a bit taken back when Scoble pointed the finger at Slashdot as one of the places that tolerates misogyny. Every time a story of a female scientist or technologist gets a mention here, inappropriate comments get posted, and modded up.
Let's take a stand as a community, here on this site. Let's not up-mod such things in the future.
is that you? :)
... are still using gopher!
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
I'm somehow missing why exactly Sierra is someone anyone would want to make death threats to. She co wrote some Java books? She likes emacs more than vi?
If I have it straight it seems to be like this
1. Female writes books, makes blog
2. Female happens to be mildly attractive
3. Unnamed individuals on intrawebs want to make fun of her because x?
4. Death threats
5. ?????
6. Litigation!
. . . that although all Java programmers are not terrorists, all terrorists ARE Java programmers?
Where are all the journalists?
...
1) Find out who the bloggers work for
2) Publish this to embarass the corporations
3) They get fired
4)
5) Profit!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
People don't talk like in the real world because they know there are consequences. If someone said to my mom what some have said to Kathy, I'd beat the living shit out of them! Most of you would as well. But once we get online and start posting anonymously, there are no consequences. We can say the most vile and violent things and people act like it's normal.
We will adapt though. The days of freewheeling indiscriminate anonymous posting is coming to an end. There are too many posts to moderate them all, but blogs can (and are) moderate the posters themselves, by requiring pre-registration. This isn't an infringement against free speech, it's common sense. If you want to say something vile and violent, do it on your own site.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
> "The Internet used to be a university. Then it became a shopping mall. But now, it's a war zone." It still is an educational tool to me...yes disagreements are the norm but the only internet war I know of is those kiddies playing FPS games.
I dont care what it was for, but when you become 'famous' you get this sort of garbage. It just comes with the territory.
.. Big deal. *IGNORE IT*
So its via a blog instead of some nut sending you hate mail
---- Booth was a patriot ----
"I'm not blaming the victim, but" ranks up there with "I'm not a racist/sexist, but" for intellectual dishonesty. Just because you claim it's not doesn't mean it isn't.
It sounds like, in all of your occurrences of mortal danger, you either knew who was attacking you or had someone who's job it was to protect you. How does that make you qualified to judge whether not a person who is concerned about anonymous threats of violence -- possibly coming from "A-list bloggers" or their acquaintances, people that she might actually come into contact with -- is overreacting?
If I weren't out of mod points, I'd mod this up myself.I've seen a lot of posts on this thread addressing the threatening posts themselves, but what I don't understand is what this lady write that prompted people to start putting up these threats. Granted, I hadn't heard of Kathy Serra until I read the article, but what could a tech blogger write that gets this type of reaction out of people? It looks like it started relatively recently... Anyone care to enlighten me as to what's going on here?
-R
You don't seem stupid (honestly), so your comment strikes me as really odd.
Is the obviousness of the AC's point that lost on you? To me, they were giving the OP an example of how it feels to be zeroed in on and threatened. It's easy enough to blow something like that off as "oversensitive" when you're detached from the situation -- "hey, it's not happening to me, what do I care?" -- but these things tend to feel different when they're directed at you.
I don't agree with their methods (posting the same kind of threatening messages this article was about), but I do understand their message.
(Nice handle, by the way -- I'm just familiar enough with Buddhism to catch the play on words.)
I'm gonna kill the next person who uses the term "blogosphere".
you have no idea what is realistically possible and what isn't.
watch much law and order svu?
know many women? any with PTSD? any who have been violently attacked at random?
no, of course you dont, youre just another stupid slashdot techie who thinks they know what is a real threat and what isnt, from the safety of a lazy-boy in your parents basement.
If this were Roland Piquepaille being harassed and threatened, we'd all be cheering.
Need some examples of the vile comments people will make? Just drop your
"That's TV, not real life."
What an absolutely stone dumb attempt at a refutation. Where do you think we as a society get our morality from these days? And in case you weren't paying attention, the 60's ended dipshit. It IS real life, albeit a somewhat stylized version of it. I suggest you play closer attention to what the women you know are doing (wait what am I saying, you knowing women...)
"Many people enjoy "The Sopranos" as well. That doesn't invalidate the taboo on murder or robbery."
Last time I watched The Sopranos, it was still very clear that A)murder was wrong B)criminals get what's coming to them. So thanks for proving the point.
So that was two tries, two absolutely idiotic abject failures. In the future, should you have an opinion, don't share it (because it's invariably wrong) and do the opposite of whatever action you consider best.
That's because you're obviously an imbecile, so you'll get along better avoiding everything you consider a good idea.
One last thing, how does it feel to have your point completely eviscerated like I did? Are you now aware that you're too intellectually stunted to have an opinion worth listening to, or does that stuntedness not allow you to properly understand that you're incapable of coming to an informed conclusion on anything?
The Internet was always a war zone. Then the corporations started turning it into a shopping mall. Now we're taking it back.
-----
PGP Key ID 0xCB8FF658
I write to my local paper a lot, and periodically I get a phone call supporting something I've written. My wife has made it quite clear that the first time I get a nasty and/or threatening call, my days as a writer are over. Being married twenty years has given me the opportunity to see that women, by and large, do not grow up with the same sense of control over their person and surroundings that you or I do.
So, while I cringe at Ms. Sierra's language of defeat and withdrawal, I have come to understand that for a good many (wo)men, flight overcomes fight when reacting to threats. You can objectify the odds, but it doesn't always overcome the subjective fear.
Luke, help me take this mask off
You have total anonymity on the internet (at least if you want it), and so it is easy for some random idiot to make a threat with virtually no possibility on it coming back to haunt them. Virtually none of these threats will never amount to anything. No one is going to be attacked or killed - If someone really intended to attack or kill someone, the LAST thing they would do is post a threat on the web.
When I worked screening email for musicians and bands, there were death threats made every single day. I read literally thousands of death threats over the years, and do you know how many turned out to be more than an angry person firing off an email? ZERO!!! None of them ever amounted to anything, out of THOUSANDS of death threats.
Death threats are everyday occurances for celebrities. If you are in the public attention, someone, somewhere, is going to throw an anonymous threat your way. So someone made a threat on your blog? So what - That is the price you pay for fame. Cancelling your speaking gigs and quitting blogging is just plain stupid. Even reporting them to the police is stupid in most cases, as the police are already overworked as it is trying to stop real crimes to be taking a statement about some angry anonymous person who they don't have the resources to track down. Not only that, a good chunk of threats are made under someone elses name in order to get them in trouble or discredit them - if the police ever did manage to track someone down, that person is probably just a victim themselves.
The modern reality is, that if you are on the net, and if you have a widely known public identity, a few people are going to make empty threats. There is no way to avoid it, short of a complete restructuring of how the internet works.
The Internet has become a war zone indeed. What should we call it, Cyber Terrorism? http://www.cybertopcops.com/
www.cybertopcops.com
Internet is now an university inside a shop mall inside a war zone inside a fundamentalist country.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
No, seriously. It must cost at least $3,000 in law enforcement time and resources to investigate something like this. The RIAA is having great success running their own bounty hunter wing, just tack on a few IP addresses for them to subpoena at $3k a pop, then fine the perp $10k, profit.
I have a friend who does stats research for a nationally known hospital and she laments that it's difficult for them to get adequate data for long-term treatment success rates as much of the info is still stored on paper, isn't shared, or is only available in digital format for the last five or ten years. But want to know the credit history of any social security number? You can have your answer in 5 minutes. Where there's the prospect of money there's efficiency, resources, and drive.
We all know that unless you're parked outside someone's house, stealing their wifi, running tor, or routed through a hacked machine there is ultimately limited anonymity on the Internet when you get down to it.
CommentBot 0.7a running with args "-module irritate,disagree -target random"
Since she wasn't just threatened with a possibly rhetorical "i could kill you" , but was threatened with specific acts of violent rape, I thought you just might be interested in the "astromically slim chances" you so easily blow off.
She doesn't need to calm down. You need to wake up.
We are all just people.
wedgies, purple nurples, ...
Teachers in the public school system have to develop at least a teflon coating, if not kevlar skin. I have some students that insist on trying to give me the purple nurple. Other students (male and female) ape the masturbation act because they know it gets a reaction. (I've been trying to figure out how to let them know that masturbation is not public behavior without encouraging them to think they've figured out a way to get attention, no success yet. Ignoring it seems to work best at the moment, but some day it's going to require a (yeach) lecture.)
I'm not defending those who threaten on the net, by the way. I'm trying to talk about how to build that kevlar skin. Near as I can tell, anyone who puts themselves in the public eye has simply got to be prepared. It's one of the evils of false royalism, vis-a-vis hollywood. (We think, just because they don't actually hold some official position, it's okay to treat them like royalty. But the result is the same -- they become the object of all sorts of attention that people should not foist on each other.)
A few years ago, I started receiving death threats on my Slashdot journal. After several emails to Taco, which were ignored, he finally responding saying that there was nothing I should do and that I should just ignore them.
4 92819 01606 97388 1756
I wonder if he would give the same advice to Kathy Sierra?
Links:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=102543&cid=87
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=102942&cid=87
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=102942&cid=87
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=103078&cid=87
Granted, no one photo-shopped pictures of me to have a noose next to my head, but a death threat is a death threat. Taco had the opportunity to take action, and he chose not to.
Then it became a shopping mall. But now, it's a war zone.
Why just settle for one when you can have both?
What?
You know what? That was me. It took five minutes to goto the blokes website, do a Whois and respond.
...
You know what else? That was simple. Imagine if I spent a couple of days tracking down this fellow. I could make his life hell. Then he would know what it was like. I'm not going to. (Besides I don't even know if this fellow is Dave Prager.)
He comment was fucked up, sexist and misogynistic. He deserves to feel scared.
Sure it might not be the best way to get the message across, but for someone that stupid
Anyway, why do you think that *I* need to have police from all levels come looking? Why do I need a visit from "serious" people? All I did was show the fucker what it might feel like. It was a single comment on Slashdot. And yet you want to use that to force all ISPs to keep records forever? Todd, seriously I think you need to get a grip. If I started stalking this fellow, or actually came to New York and shot him, then you could have cause for concern.
What was that quote about security and freedom again? Whatever it was, the point is that the government doesn't stop crime, the government commits crime. And forcing ISPs to record everything, that just makes it easier for them.
NO ONE is safe. I've seen people on forums mock/insult/degrade Iraqi refugees, children who were born malformed/disabled/disadvantaged and soldiers disfigured from combat (regardless of which war). Show me ONE notable figure that can be talked about on the internet without being insulted/mocked/degraded for one week and I'll admit the long term use of internet to us /. geeks has simply "desensitized" us.
She advocates being a woman in public. That's still too much for some people to put up with.
Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
My question to everyone is: if Kathy Sierra were your daughter or wife, would you say she's over reacting? Personally, I can't see how there can be any grey area in this matter. If you write something that can be interpreted as a threat by anyone, then anyone in a position of authority has to assume a worst-case scenario. Saying death threats and threats of sexual violence can be safely interpreted as jokes is purely asinine. Personally, I think if you are so stupid as to write a joke in the form of a death threat (especially to someone you don't even know), you deserve no mercy. In the workplace, I believe people like this need to be fired flat-out and flagged to would-be employer's as a potential threat in the workplace.
Any tolerance one gives to this behaviour allows further digressions in the name of mis-interpreted humour, and my second question is: where do you draw the line if not right at the start? I'm sorry but lack of tact, professionalism, common courtesy and stupidity aren't valid excuses for making comments that hurt or scare others.
In regards to the people who complain that such strict ideas make them afraid to say anything in the workplace: if you don't know how to act professionally in a professional environment you really shouldn't be there. If you ask a co-worker out, do it outside of your workplace, and if you really don't know how to tell whether or not a statement is offensive or inappropriate... best just to shut up all together then.
Yes, yes, yes, and yes.
Instead of running and hiding from these people she should stand strong. If she is really afraid for her life, she should take some self defense classes as well as some training with a firearm. Then she'll be prepared for most anything the morons can come up with.
I read the linked comments, and I can tell you that I've had much worse posted to me online.
I did not take it seriously.
If you look at what Kathy wrote, she also did not take threats like that seriously until they crossed a line. For her, that line was posting some detailed and threatening images of her.
Those links that you posted, all someone did was take 3 seconds to write "die fag die". That doesn't show much commitment to the cause--it sounds like more of a recommendation than a threat.
If you look at her site, there was more than a photo of her next to a noose. There were some pretty heavily-photoshopped images and it shows a lot more commitment and hatred. I don't think you can compare that to your links, and neither do I think what you linked to constitutes a death threat.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
All it takes is ONE idiot to try and ruin you.
Hell, my ex made it IMPOSSIBLE for me to post on Livejournal for about a year after we'd split, because every time I posted there (no matter how short or what), he claimed it was "free time" I spent online avoiding him, as though now that I no longer spoke to him I somehow had a responsibility to be elbow-deep in work 24/7, and so every time I made even a *TINY* post, for the the next three weeks I'd be receiving emails and anyone who had the misfortune to know me online would receive pornographic spam from his account impersonating me.
To make matters worse, he somehow managed to know exactly when I logged onto certain forums, impersonated friends (to know when I'd made FO posts), and eventually I was stuck playing children's websites just to avoid one single asshole, albeit a persistent one. Technically I still pretty much am, except now I'm actually - guess what? - too busy to put up with him, because I eventually got off most of the internet just to be sane again and got into other things.
Unless you want to call me and every other person who's used the privacy filters on sites like this Drama Whores, you need to get your head out of the sand.
i.e. "Stop reacting to the bullies, they'll go away."
Knowing how to use a firearm doesn't save you from a car bomb, etc. etc.
Focus on how to prevent the crime by putting your crosshairs on the CRIMINAL, or else you're just feeding into the mentality that she deserves whatever she has coming just because she's female.
Hey dude, I think I saw your testicles. They're in your wife's purse next to her tampons.
It gets worse. My vasectomy was my doctor's last case for the day before a dinner date, which explained why - I swear to God - she wore a black lace gown with the surgical mask... at least, that's the story she went with.
Luke, help me take this mask off