Uh Oh, rEv's really screwed now...

[DaveDodo007]

The good news is there's fuck-all they can do to me or anyone else outside of NZ.

Good news indeed, seeing that rEv does not live in New Zealand.

Doesn't matter, Big Brother is always watching and waiting or is it Big Sister now, I keep forgetting.

[Seth]

The good news is there's fuck-all they can do to me or anyone else outside of NZ.

Good news indeed, seeing that rEv does not live in New Zealand.

Yeah, I remembered that right after I posted the thread. You may substitute "Blind Groper" for rEv. Or anybody else from NZ. And I would not be at all surprised to see Oz go down the same road.

[Seth]

Hmm. To be serious, the law should protect the vulnerable, but one cannot legislate for personal resilience and self-confidence. In the UK, assisting in, or encouraging at person to, suicide is an offence. The problem with internet relations is that they can be vicariously anonymous and therefore relatively, and significantly, incorrigible. I'm not against such a law in principle, but I fear that it being proposed in desperation and after the horse has long ago bolted.

Perhaps the vulnerable should stay the hell off the internet...This sort of "least common denominator" law is simply intolerable, but predictably Socialist. If you can't take the heat, don't go in the kitchen.

[Blind groper]

Callous as always, Seth.

[Seth]

Callous as always, Seth.

Why should everyone's right to free speech be constrained because some few people can't ignore something somebody says about them?

[Blind groper]

There is no such unrestrained free speech and never was. There have always been numerous limits on what you can say. If I accused you, Seth, of something that was probably a lie, but malicious, you would have the right to sue me. The same applies here, with malicious messages on the internet now being illegal. I approve. There are a whole bunch of nasty assholes who need to be stopped.

[rainbow]

Hmm. To be serious, the law should protect the vulnerable, but one cannot legislate for personal resilience and self-confidence. In the UK, assisting in, or encouraging at person to, suicide is an offence. The problem with internet relations is that they can be vicariously anonymous and therefore relatively, and significantly, incorrigible. I'm not against such a law in principle, but I fear that it being proposed in desperation and after the horse has long ago bolted.

Perhaps the vulnerable should stay the hell off the internet...This sort of "least common denominator" law is simply intolerable, but predictably Socialist. If you can't take the heat, don't go in the kitchen.

It is known as Civilisation, Seth.

Perhaps it will spread to your part of the world one day.

[cronus]

Hmm. To be serious, the law should protect the vulnerable, but one cannot legislate for personal resilience and self-confidence. In the UK, assisting in, or encouraging at person to, suicide is an offence. The problem with internet relations is that they can be vicariously anonymous and therefore relatively, and significantly, incorrigible. I'm not against such a law in principle, but I fear that it being proposed in desperation and after the horse has long ago bolted.

Perhaps the vulnerable should stay the hell off the internet...This sort of "least common denominator" law is simply intolerable, but predictably Socialist. If you can't take the heat, don't go in the kitchen.

It is known as Civilisation, Seth.

Perhaps it will spread to your part of the world one day.

Didn't say anything...

[mistermack]

No. Even though Seth is a self admitted troll, he has not committed the kind of utterly malicious on-line crimes this law was set up to catch. I say this because I know from watching, that Rationalia members are unusually thick skinned, and seriously unlikely to commit suicide because of something someone posts.

I have to disagree.
Seth has driven me to suicide several times.

[DaveDodo007]

There is no such unrestrained free speech and never was. There have always been numerous limits on what you can say. If I accused you, Seth, of something that was probably a lie, but malicious, you would have the right to sue me. The same applies here, with malicious messages on the internet now being illegal. I approve. There are a whole bunch of nasty assholes who need to be stopped.

I agree with the first part, though don't you think the nanny state is getting ridiculous and any power you hand over to the government wouldn't be abused by the state.

[Brian Peacock]

Hmm. To be serious, the law should protect the vulnerable, but one cannot legislate for personal resilience and self-confidence. In the UK, assisting in, or encouraging a person to, suicide is an offence. The problem with internet relations is that they can be vicariously anonymous and therefore relatively, and significantly, incorrigible. I'm not against such a law in principle, but I fear that it's being proposed in desperation and the horse has long ago bolted.

Perhaps the vulnerable should stay the hell off the internet...This sort of "least common denominator" law is simply intolerable, but predictably Socialist. If you can't take the heat, don't go in the kitchen.

In your eagerness to raise the spectre of Socialism--raised merely to dish out your patented brand of correction--I fear you missed the part where I said, "The law should protect the vulnerable, but one cannot legislate for personal resilience and self-confidence." And you also missed the part where I said that internet relations where invariably private affairs and therefore difficult, if not virtually impossible, to police. And then you missed the part where I said I understand the imperative, that being the law's duty to protect the vulnerable--a common denominator if you like--but that it will be of little use in preventing suicide even if it offers a legal tool to address sever bullying after-the-fact. In short, you missed all the points of my post.

"Perhaps the vulnerable should stay the hell off the internet," is simply victim blaming and implies neither the State nor the law have any role in protecting those at risk of attack, abuse or neglect, nor any role in preventing same or providing a remedy where it occurs. That is, in effect, a state of lawlessness.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Currently, there is no extradition treaty between Rationalia and New Zealand. Our only officially sanctioned extradition arrangement is with the London Borough of Croydon and dates back to Brian Peacock's unfortunate little incident with the policeman's helmet and the tadpoles.

The staff will handle any requests for extradition on a case-by-case, quid-pro-quo, ad-hoc and tic-tac-toe basis. Unless it's a Tuesday. The extradition office shuts on Tuesdays for Lent.

Look, I explained all that to the Jury who, in their wisdom, found in my favour. I refuse to be harangued in this libellous fashion, especially as the Judge discharged me without charge and accepted my explanation in full; that I found the officer's helmet on a wall when I needed something to carry some hot tapioca to a sick widow. The facts are that a simple 'wardrobe malfunction', when my belt buckle snapped unexpectedly, meant I had no option but to run into the photobooth that just happened to be nearby. Can we please drop this now? I find all this very distressing and am just trying to put it all behind me and get on with my life.

So, nothing to do with that bribe then.

Allegations were made regarding all 12 jurors finding themselves in possession of World Cup final tickets. It was only the intercession of Mr. Peacock's personal friend, Sepp Blatter, that cleared up that "little misunderstanding".

[tattuchu]

It's OK when rEv does it because it is for The Greater Good.

[laklak]

Fuck civilization. What's it ever done for me? Apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what has it done for me?

[JimC]

The good news is there's fuck-all they can do to me or anyone else outside of NZ.

Good news indeed, seeing that rEv does not live in New Zealand.

He actually lives exactly on the border between NSW and Queensland, and is, as a result, a stateless person...