Not the brighest bulb in the package

[WhatThe]

At the very least they have likely had their eyes opened as to the potential of "mob-think".

And once again reaffirmed to me that people in general are gossipy busybodies with too much time on their hands.
Former service man who started the fire Lindsey stone Facebook page, you sir are a jackass. You think you served for freedom but yet you have severely undercut what that word really means. I do not salute or recognize your contributions.

I honestly think that many soldiers are rolling in their graves.

[fluffy]

And once again reaffirmed to me that people in general are gossipy busybodies with too much time on their hands.

I have to think that the bell curve is still weighted to the more tolerant and compassionate end. The alternative is too scary.

[Lady tehMa]

Hmmm - this is interesting. He doesn't mention this particular case, wonder if it was in the works before it all came to light? At any rate, I would deem it relevant.

http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-83794-1032-.htm#83794

Risks of posting comments on Internet
by Contributed - Story: 83794
Nov 27, 2012 / 7:00 am

The Internet has given everyone a voice - whether on Facebook, in a chat room, or in a forum. This is not always a good thing…

There are a few types of online posters.


Photo: Contributed
Some posters try to make intelligent comments and conversation. Others post online for therapy, telling the world their every thought (with little filter). Others are more interested in ‘stirring the pot’, simply trying to irritate and annoy other people by posting inflammatory, threatening, and off-topic comments. These people are referred to as ‘trolls’. Most trolls are harmless (and are likely children).

Whatever your intentions when posting online, it is important to know that the worst thing that can happen to you is not a ‘slap on the wrist’ from the forum or website moderator/administrator. That couldn’t be further from the truth. Believe it or not, there can be legal consequences.

To start, there can be criminal consequences when posting comments online.

If you have viewed a thread or visited a chat room, you have probably seen posters act completely ridiculous with each other, even threatening each other. I have seen comments like, “You better hope that we never meet in person because you will be very sorry”. This type of comment could lead to a criminal charge. For more information, you can review section 264 (criminal harassment) and section 264.1 (uttering threats) of the Criminal Code.

While criminal penalties can be bad, civil (i.e. financial) penalties can be even worse. Depending on the amount of money that you could be forced to pay, you could be wishing that you had been taken to criminal court…

A common lawsuit made against Internet posters is for defamation of character. A few weeks ago, I wrote about defamation: Sued for spreading rumours? For easy reference, a defamation lawsuit follows when a person makes a communication (written or spoken) about another person/organization that hurts the reputation of that person/organization.

And for your information, just because a poster is anonymous in his/her postings does not mean that he/she is immune from liability. People’s real names can and will be located from their ISP (internet service provider). Hiding your name is ineffective.

To illustrate that posters should be careful, consider the following case: Uppal v Diler, [2012] O. J. No. 2713. In this case, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Small Claims Court) awarded $22,000 for a plaintiff dentist against the dentist’s former patient. The former patient had sent defamatory emails, uploaded postings on YouTube, and made statements on the website for the Association of Dentists (about the dentist). The Court held that the former patient was deliberately campaigning to harass the dentist and smear his reputation. Interestingly, the Court said that it would have awarded $45,000.00, but the dentist did not seek this amount in his claim.

Also, for your information, websites hosting threads/forums need to be careful, too, in ensuring that defamatory comments are not posted on their websites. If defamatory comments are present on a website (about a company or a person), that website may receive demand letters (from that company or person), requesting that the defamatory comments be removed. It may wise to conform to such letters; while unpopular, it may be financially-wise.

Outside of civil and criminal consequences, your postings can haunt you in other ways (so be careful).

For instance, there are numerous examples of people being fired for posting about their employer. Remember Mark Jen? He was fired from Google after 11 days for posting on his blog about Google, which included comparing Google to his former employer, Microsoft.

Also consider that in personal injury cases, it is not uncommon for ICBC to rely on photos that motor vehicle crash victims post on Facebook. These photographs, of course, show the victim smiling, which ICBC argues is indicative that the victim is not ‘that hurt’ (because people who have soft-tissue injuries never smile, right?). As silly as it may seem to rely on Facebook photos, it happens.

The Quebec Superior Court said it best in Laforest c. Collins, 2012 QCCS 3078: “The Web has become the most powerful and frequently used medium of communication on earth. It permits wars to be halted quickly, criminals to be quickly captured. Teaching has no limit. Communication can be personal as well as impersonal. The Web can make anyone a celebrity in a few minutes. It can tarnish or destroy a reputation with one click.”

Finally, outside of the legal consequences, Internet posters should be respectful in their posts. It’s like going to a party: just because there isn’t a law that says you should be respectful and considerate, it doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be.

**The information contained in this column should not be treated by readers as legal advice and should not be relied on without detailed legal counsel being sought.

[WhatThe]

I have to think that the bell curve is still weighted to the more tolerant and compassionate end. The alternative is too scary.

I'm not defending her joke, I'm admonishing the reaction. I would like to think that way too Fluffy, and for the most part I do but when so many act with deliberate callousness and enjoy or revel in it, that makes me sad and ashamed to call them my "neighbours".

[Glacier]

I think this is a case of someone trying to be funny without realizing how it looks to the rest of us. My initial impression of the picture is that she wasn't saying "F-you" to those who gave their lives for us, but rather she was attempting to display what I call "antonymic humour" with the sign (no pun intended).

Of course, using that thing between her ears just a little should have set of the disrespect alarm bells. To me there is a big difference between deliberate disrespect and unintentional disrespect, much like first degree murder is far worse than manslaughter.

I'm pretty sure at the very least we've all unintentionally disrespected someone at least once in our lives. Does the time fit the crime? All I will say is that he who is without sin can cast the first stone.

[fluffy]

My thoughts as well Glacier. The more these discussions go on the more the issue for me turns away from the initial act to other people's reaction to it. I agree that it was a stupid thing to do, but the number of people who would like to see her burnt at the stake so to speak is staggering. I've been in a couple of discussions at other sites, American based sites, and it is particularly intense there.

[Fancy]

This incident reminded me of the inappropriate halloween costumes that caused such an uproar a couple of years ago. The police were actually called in to investigate but no charges were laid. The men were totally apologetic and eventually everyone moved on but that incident affected a good many people. In this case, the majority appeared to want these girls fired and the vindictiveness can still be seen. That's not healthy. I can understand why their employer let them go but I think these girls are quite capable of doing something for their community to show themselves in a better light and to let others know they do have respect. Actions speak louder than words. I hate to think of them hiding until everything blows over.

[Bsuds]

Now there's a good idea. If it really was a mistake in judgment then they should be able to make amends by doing some kind of service.
Say like helping some disabled Veterans somehow.

[Lady tehMa]

That is a stellar idea! Now the questions remain, will it occur to them and if so - will they do it?

[Glacier]

Amen to that.

[WhatThe]

Now there's a good idea. If it really was a mistake in judgment then they should be able to make amends by doing some kind of service.
Say like helping some disabled Veterans somehow.

I agree with the sentiment of the last few posts but I don't think they should "make amends". Like I said before, if you take offence that's really your problem, not mine. That's simply because people take offence at anything, look at that Muslim video a couple months ago. We aren't offended (well I'm not anyway, just think the producers are morons) but they're rioting.
In fact, I think it's the other way around. Miss stone has this legacy now that will never be forgotten (the internet) and could very well prevent further employment (or meaningful or not get the position applied for) meanwhile the ravenous pack of vindictive dogs will forget all about this and continue with their lives with NO repercussions to their financial well being. Even the other girl is getting off because nobody will remember her name.

[Fancy]

All the more reason to get out of her parent's basement and tackle the issue head on - even volunteering at a soup kitchen would look good on a resume

In fact, I think it's the other way around. Miss stone has this legacy now that will never be forgotten (the internet) and could very well prevent further employment (or meaningful or not get the position applied for)