Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Facebook Privacy Security Social Networks The Internet Twitter United Kingdom Your Rights Online

House of Commons Could Force Social Networks To Identify Trolls 216

concertina226 writes with this news snipped from Techworld UK: "Websites such as Facebook and Twitter could be forced to unmask so-called internet trolls, under new government proposals in the Defamation Bill. The move comes after a British woman won a landmark case to force Facebook to reveal the identities of internet trolls. On 30 May, Nicola Brookes from Brighton was granted a High Court order after receiving 'vicious and depraved' taunts on Facebook. The bill, which is being debated in the House of Commons [Tuesday], will allow victims of online abuse to discover the identity of their persecutors and bring a case against them. The move also aims to protect websites from threats of litigation for inadvertently displaying defamatory comments."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

House of Commons Could Force Social Networks To Identify Trolls

Comments Filter:
  • by hessian ( 467078 ) on Tuesday June 12, 2012 @11:01AM (#40295805) Homepage Journal

    The problem is that "troll" is a term used to mean anyone who says something unpopular, as well as anyone who deliberately provokes other people into tantrums.

    The better question is whether we will have anonymity at all. I know from looking at the comments on CNN and other newspapers that a lot of sites would rather dispense with anonymity entirely.

    The problem with this is that it is de facto censorship of important opinions. Racial information (the ultimate taboo), anti-democratic thought, anti-mainstream culture and even occult religions all need protection.

    When we call declare someone with unpopular opinions a "troll" and look up their IP, these ideas won't get expressed on the big sites, leaving only small dissident blogs that 99% of the internet audience will never see.

  • by JustAnotherIdiot ( 1980292 ) on Tuesday June 12, 2012 @11:02AM (#40295817)
    People will just start trolling behind proxies/on public networks.
  • by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Tuesday June 12, 2012 @11:03AM (#40295831) Homepage

    They can also simply block all users FROM the UK and solve it that way as well....

    Companies always have the option to ignore laws from other countries and block the freedom hating country as a whole.

  • by Dan541 ( 1032000 ) on Tuesday June 12, 2012 @11:06AM (#40295871) Homepage

    I found someone on youtube who has the right idea about cyberbullies.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_ZiRT8Nwkk [youtube.com]

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 12, 2012 @11:11AM (#40295949)

    The problem is that "troll" is a term used to mean anyone who says something unpopular, as well as anyone who deliberately provokes other people into tantrums.

    No. That's what dummies have come to imply it means. They are using the world wrong. Sadly, many of these dummies are also slashdot moderators.

    A troll is someone who attempts to elicit an emotional response by using a seemingly sincere platform. As such, many see this as merely "unpopular" but they completely miss the entire point of the discourse. Some trolling is done to lead the ignorant and stubborn by the nose to an obvious conclusion to which the audience is seemingly too dense, ignorant, or stubborn to find on their own. This is pretty rare these days. In other cases, trolling is done by pathetic people who enjoy sucking the life out of beneficial dialogs. Meanings, its a sad, sad cry for attention. Usually the later are people who are seriously emotionally damaged and trolling is their primary source of social interaction.

    Which basically means, those who believe trolling means someone disagrees or finds a post unpopular are themselves likely a troll. Trolling does NOT simply you they have a different point of view or that an opinion is unpopular - ignoring the fact that most slashdot moderators these days are far too dense to comprehend the distinction.

  • by deathtopaulw ( 1032050 ) on Tuesday June 12, 2012 @11:22AM (#40296073) Homepage

    ...someone who attempts to elicit an emotional response by using a seemingly sincere platform.

    This sounds like a definition of "art" I heard once.

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...