Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We don't have free speech and the UK and never have, and long may that reign.


However, not sure that this is a proportionate or appropriate response - and I'm not well enough versed in UK law to know if that requirement is enshrined within it. It's certainly trotted out regularly enough for it to appear to be a foundation tenet of policing.


Still, I don't know how much of it is true either, and it doesn't hurt to put the willies up gobshite arrogant teenagers.

I've seen the tweets but can't remember verbatim. Have a look at @glinner timeline from yesterday evening ish


Good version of chronology here as well but can't see if it contains all tweets

http://www.archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/rileyy69-aka-reece-of-weymouth-and.html?m=1

The airport tweet was quite different tho. That was stupid because it wasn't directed in any way towards the "subject"


By sending messages repeatedly and offensively directly to your target(s).... That's different in my book. Once you address someone directly (in life, print or social media) you have responsibilities and expectations. If I started posting threats through your mailbox for long enough you'd call the police

I think there is a way to deal specifically with threatening behaviour online via already existing harassment laws.....


Twitter could monitor itself but like facebook is a victim of it's own success....i.e. to much traffic to monitor and so has to be reactive to complaint rather than monitoring.


Several celebrities have deactivated twitter accounts because of mornic bullies with nothing better to do...

I seem to remember reading that the tweet was something like "you let your dad down" (his father died last year). Nasty and spiteful, but not threatening. Not sure how it's illegal.


Unfortunately if celebrities want to use social media, they are going to have to learn to ignore the idiots.

sorry Jeremy - in case youdidn't see it before... did you read the link I posted above?


ok the "death threats" weren't send directly to Daley, but to other people directly and plenty of faux "everyone deserves a second chance" when people got on his back


And I agree with the blogger who is using the episode of an example of "twitter mobs", and as I said earlier maybe* arresting him isn't best way forward BUT he is a fine example of the the type of idot that Admin on here has to deal with. This guy has been reported by many people long before his Daley tweets and is basically pissing in the pool. I can't stand the whole "oh I'm really sorry I'll behave nexttime" bullshit from these guys. Chance after chance after chance is just abused


* I say maybe because I actually think this guy could be so disturbed, it won't do much harm to have him in for questioning.

I think that last line is more suggesting that everyone (Nottingham airport, Tom Daley, you, me) ignore tweets like this so they don't get the attention they crave


I'm undecided if I agree with that strategy to be honest. But nor do I think the line is blaming Daley for causing the storm per se

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> has someone passed a law making it

> illegal to be a complete a***hole?


someone passed a law (in 1998) that made it an offence to send indecent, offensive or threatening communications and i believe that the investigation here was into such a 'malicious communication'

Sooo... just what's the diffrence between this and the bile Frankie Boyle tweets?


Does nothing but enforce the impression I have that twitter is the the biggest pile of poo on the internet. Can't discuss anything serious such as politics as the limits leave no room for any discussion of any sort just vacouus sloganeering, passed on jokes, and petty spats between tedious celebrities. The perfect metaphor for our dumbed down culture.


As I've said, I've yet to read a Tweet that's made me think better of a tweeter or even just 'think'. Most are just innane or a bit embarrasing tbh.

Twitter can be a pile of poo but it can be equally useful. Again, I think it depends on what you expect from it and how you engage. Same as any social networking thing really. I don't think anything that can be said in 140 characters is designed to make you think but if the person 'tweeting' is interesting/worthwhile, they can often point you to interesting and educational links that you'd otherwise not be aware of.


In this case it, it looked like the teenager 'backed down' but by then, there was a twitter mob baying for his blood if I read SJ's article correctly.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...