Comments on: Bullying My Ass! It’s the Internet. Deal with it!

By: Yeast Radio - Bloated Lesbian of All Media » Blog Archive » yr568 Marketing Bloggers are Worth Protesting for, not War!

Sun, 01 Apr 2007 10:20:54 +0000

[...] A blogger gets bullied. More info here. [...]

By: Xavier

Xavier — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 15:34:39 +0000

Scobelizer, Adam Curry et al. are blunt tools.

I find them to be hopelessly self-serving, self-referential, compulsive public masturbators.

Let’s not forget the excellence of thought Adam Curry and Dave Winer demonstrated when they were outraged and shocked that the valley of Madge’s taco boasted only synthetic yeast, and then expected people at large to be sympathetic and similarly “tricked.”

When the clan of self-appointed “A-List” bloggers isn’t 100% occupied having sex with itself, its busy being hopelessly mundane, generating “content” in a bid to remain relevant – updating for the sake of updating.

The “A-List” blogger is of a style and community unto itself, and I think probably only appears more important. In reality, isn’t it only their core audience that’s paying full, proper, involved attention?

Ultimately Miss IT Obesity’s attacks are just going to sink into a rarely-clicked archive, she can’t effect real-world change outside her sphere.

I’d never even heard of Miss IT Obesity until Madge mentioned her.

As Zsa Zsa says, “long tail, darlink.”

There’s an easy fix for being attacked-in-passing on your own blog anyway:

* http://markbernstein.org/May0501/Comments.html
* http://blogsavvy.net/an-argument-for-getting-rid-of-comments

By: Shannon

Shannon — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 03:36:57 +0000

I also wanted to thank you for playing the whole piece by Tranny Wreck-I sometimes forget that people still get beat up & murdered for purely being who they are. I was really pissed when I heard that other guy. Freaks? I think it takes major guts to change one’s sex and to publicize it. I respect people like that.

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:56:09 +0000

@breton: Agreed

By: Breton

Breton — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:24:31 +0000

Okay, so I concede that there probably shouldn’t be a law against this type of speech. My point is that it shouldn’t be socially acceptable.

By: Breton

Breton — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:14:36 +0000

The two blogs you speak of were voluntarily shut down, by their owners, because they agreed with her that the threats crossed the line. What she has posted has concrete effects, yes, but I disagree when you argue that the threats do not have concrete effects. Such comments, when coming from a position of authority as they did, go beyond just playing with her emotions as an individual. It promotes a culture of misogynistic sexual objectification of women, and gives it a sheen of legitimacy. It gives the appearance that this disgusting and ineffective (not to mention completely devoid of humor) form of expression is a perfectly valid way object to someone. It isn’t, and it doesn’t matter who you apply it to.

She is probably overreacting a little bit, but this is not necessarily a bad thing, and I don’t think it’s a bad thing if this type of “free speech” is stifled as a result. Disagree with her, point out faults in her reasoning, even random insults are fine with me. These violent and sexual threats were simply tasteless and irresponsible.

By: Administrator

Administrator — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:47:37 +0000

@Chris- Please provide me with the link (or exact quote) from either bobsyeruncle OR meankids in which “i’m going to rape and kill you” appeared. It is my understanding that Ms. Marketing Person *inferred* what the person wrote to mean that while the words written were different.

Also, you wrote, “My right to swing my fist stops where your face starts.”.

I am a gay man. I could just as easily claim that you are passive-aggressively threatening me. Alas, I am not a moron.

By: chris

chris — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 05:38:15 +0000

I’d have to agree w/ that this is not anything related to free speech…this is someone saying “I’m going to rape and kill you” and then showing photoshopped pictures of it happening. That is a crime.

My right to swing my fist stops where your face starts. My right to free speech stops where I threaten your safety.

By: Administrator

Administrator — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 03:26:58 +0000

@Breton,
I admit my claim of a PR stunt was kind of lame. I have no way of knowing that. It”s just a guess and not really important to my issue here. But, you ask what could be wong if this were a PR stunt? Well, her actions have concrete effects in the actual world, unlike those of her accusers. Two worthwhile and clever blogs were shut down because of her. That’s the harm and that’s also the answer to your other question: “In what way has she threatened their freedom of speech any more than you or they have threatened hers?” Well in the way that their means of communication is now gone because of one person’s (what I perceive to be) insecurites.

Her attacks are not insults. THey are much worse. Her intent is to set a precident for stifling certain types of free speech on the internet at a time when personal freedoms are constantly taken away. This, she does, in response to a few people calling her names. That’s ridiculous and she should be ashamed.

I have never heard of this woman before today and I have only read one post of hers. I don’t know her and do not judge the quality of her content other than the post in question.

By: Breton

Breton — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 01:29:09 +0000

Freedom of speech is important, no doubt. Where would we be without the freedom to disagree, and express our own arguments, and opinions. The comments and images in question (I did find out who you were talking about eventually) do not fall under the banner of arguments, disagreements, or opinions. They are not reasoned rebuttals to things that she has said. They have nothing to do with anything she has posted online. At best, they could be described as Ad Hominem fallacies, but the intent to threaten and intimidate is clear. The problem, is not the content of the comments and blog posts themselves, the problem is the culture that they promote. The culture where it is promoted as perfectly reasonable and acceptable to deride someone not for *who* she is, or what she has said, but for *what* she is.

You could argue that she is doing this as a PR stunt, and she should write something interesting instead. What would be wrong with that? Is the freedom of these threatening posts more sacred to you than her freedom to babble about things you’re not interested in? Is it more sacred than her freedom to be a drama queen?

In what way has she threatened their freedom of speech any more than you or they have threatened hers?

By: Administrator

Administrator — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 22:05:50 +0000

I’m sick of pollyanna attacks on free speech. The only thing that could be construed as a threat was on HER OWN PERSONAL BLOG. That is nobody’s problem but her and her alleged stalker or whatever you call it.

She’s using this as a PR stunt. You can call me an ASS. I am secure in knowing that I am not one. Perhaps others are not so secure?

By: Richard Haven

Richard Haven — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 21:29:27 +0000

You are an ass.

Freedom of speech does not include the right to threaten; that is assault (look it up). Burning crosses across the street from black families falls into the same class.

Perhaps you should understand the idea of “quoting”. If I quote someone (e.g. on my blog), that does not mean that I agree with them.