Does an online presence change morality?

[Unknown Soldier]

I think most of us will agree that we should respect people we encounter in our homes, at work, when shopping at the local supermarket, and anywhere else we might see people face-to-face. We refrain from cursing in public and obviously refrain from insulting people or calling them names. If we own or manage a place where we serve the public, we are polite to them and accommodate them the best way we reasonably can respecting their views and acting on their complaints to resolve their difficulties.

Our "online presence" appears to change these rules significantly at least for a lot of people. Many evidently see the internet as a place of mischief where the distance and anonymity of that medium opens the door to opportunities to treat others badly. Their mistreatment includes bullying in gangs, cursing out those with different or opposing views, insulting others, threats, and engaging in name-calling. Those who own and run these online social mediums are often lax in enforcing rules to prevent this kind of abuse and may even encourage it or engage in it firsthand by bullying anybody who does not support their agenda.

How bad can it get? Pretty darned bad. Here is but one tragic example: Boy reportedly hangs self after bullies tell him to commit suicide.

So I recommend that we rethink how we conduct ourselves anywhere and that includes online. To answer my own question: No, being online does not change morality. What's wrong offline is wrong online.

 

[bilby]

Is this OP an epiphany; Or a case of an astonishing, gob-smacking, jaw-dropping failure of self-awareness?

If it is the former, then the next post will be an apology.

I'm seriously not holding my breath.

 

[pood]

So oddly amusing to read these un-self-aware lucubrations.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I, for one, was sincerely moved when Melania Trump used her First Lady status to call for the end of cyber bullying.
Sincerely. Moved.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I, for one, was sincerely moved when Melania Trump used her First Lady status to call for the end of cyber bullying.
Sincerely. Moved.

I agree with her. It's time we start taking action to put an end to these crimes.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I, for one, was sincerely moved when Melania Trump used her First Lady status to call for the end of cyber bullying.
Sincerely. Moved.

I agree with her. It's time we start taking action to put an end to these crimes.

And what actions do you think were best exemplified by Melania and the Trump administration towards that end?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I, for one, was sincerely moved when Melania Trump used her First Lady status to call for the end of cyber bullying.
Sincerely. Moved.

I agree with her. It's time we start taking action to put an end to these crimes.

And what actions do you think were best exemplified by Melania and the Trump administration towards that end?

In the cases where people are encouraged to commit suicide, cyber-criminals should be charged as felons. Fines and or prison sentences may be appropriate depending on the harm done to people.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I, for one, was sincerely moved when Melania Trump used her First Lady status to call for the end of cyber bullying.
Sincerely. Moved.

I agree with her. It's time we start taking action to put an end to these crimes.

And what actions do you think were best exemplified by Melania and the Trump administration towards that end?

In the cases where people are encouraged to commit suicide, cyber-criminals should be charged as felons. Fines and or prison sentences may be appropriate depending on the harm done to people.

That’s not an answer to my question. Perhaps you mistakenly quoted my post in response to a different question.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I, for one, was sincerely moved when Melania Trump used her First Lady status to call for the end of cyber bullying.
Sincerely. Moved.

I agree with her. It's time we start taking action to put an end to these crimes.

And what actions do you think were best exemplified by Melania and the Trump administration towards that end?

In the cases where people are encouraged to commit suicide, cyber-criminals should be charged as felons. Fines and or prison sentences may be appropriate depending on the harm done to people.

That’s not an answer to my question. Perhaps you mistakenly quoted my post in response to a different question.

Your question is vague. What did the Trumps do?

 

[Shadowy Man]

I, for one, was sincerely moved when Melania Trump used her First Lady status to call for the end of cyber bullying.
Sincerely. Moved.

I agree with her. It's time we start taking action to put an end to these crimes.

And what actions do you think were best exemplified by Melania and the Trump administration towards that end?

In the cases where people are encouraged to commit suicide, cyber-criminals should be charged as felons. Fines and or prison sentences may be appropriate depending on the harm done to people.

That’s not an answer to my question. Perhaps you mistakenly quoted my post in response to a different question.

Your question is vague. What did the Trumps do?

That was my question to you. It wasn’t vague at all. You were agreeing with Melania so I was wondering what actions you may have agreed with.

 

[southernhybrid]

I find it hypocritical that the author of the OP is suggesting that cyber bullying should be a crime when in another OP, he was strongly against censorship of any kind.

Here it is in his own words:

I'd define "censorship" as the effort to silence speech, written or oral, and to hide away images that are seen to be offensive. The outward rationale for such censorship is that some speech is harmful if heard or read and some images are harmful if seen. The censors are invariably more powerful than those whom they censor, and so censorship results essentially from whomever can apply the greater force. In other words, censorship is "might is right." Censorship is often a tool for those who want to impose their ideological, political, or religious views on others in the guise of morality.

So my own opinion is that censorship is immoral, and I see it as doing far more harm than what harm it supposedly prevents.

 

[pood]

I find it hypocritical that the author of the OP is suggesting that cyber bullying should be a crime when in another OP, he was strongly against censorship of any kind.

Here it is in his own words:

I'd define "censorship" as the effort to silence speech, written or oral, and to hide away images that are seen to be offensive. The outward rationale for such censorship is that some speech is harmful if heard or read and some images are harmful if seen. The censors are invariably more powerful than those whom they censor, and so censorship results essentially from whomever can apply the greater force. In other words, censorship is "might is right." Censorship is often a tool for those who want to impose their ideological, political, or religious views on others in the guise of morality.

So my own opinion is that censorship is immoral, and I see it as doing far more harm than what harm it supposedly prevents.

Not to mention the hypocrisy of “banning” (lol) a bunch of us after complaining about censorship.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Your question is vague. What did the Trumps do?

That was my question to you. It wasn’t vague at all. You were agreeing with Melania so I was wondering what actions you may have agreed with.

I agree with her that cyberbullying should not be allowed.

Anyway, can you please address the topic: If you're online, then does your "online presence" change what is right and wrong for you morally speaking? It appears that for many people yes, since doing online what doing offline would get them into trouble, then they do it online to avoid punishment. If you want to express hatred for those who disagree with you, then do so over the internet because there you're likely to get away with it. Do you agree with that?

Now, some here have brought up the question of censorship. People can say what they want as long as others don't need to read it. The freedom to post should be balanced with the freedom to avoid reading abuse and hatred.

 

[pood]

Your question is vague. What did the Trumps do?

That was my question to you. It wasn’t vague at all. You were agreeing with Melania so I was wondering what actions you may have agreed with.

I agree with her that cyberbullying should not be allowed.

Anyway, can you please address the topic: If you're online, then does your "online presence" change what is right and wrong for you morally speaking? It appears that for many people yes, since doing online what doing offline would get them into trouble, then they do it online to avoid punishment. If you want to express hatred for those who disagree with you, then do so over the internet because there you're likely to get away with it. Do you agree with that?

Now, some here have brought up the question of censorship. People can say what they want as long as others don't need to read it. The freedom to post should be balanced with the freedom to avoid reading abuse and hatred.

But not the freedom to avoid having kids sexually abused for the profit of pornographers, eh?

 

[pood]

I, for one, was sincerely moved when Melania Trump used her First Lady status to call for the end of cyber bullying.
Sincerely. Moved.

I agree with her. It's time we start taking action to put an end to these crimes.

Irony deficient, are we?

 

[Shadowy Man]

Your question is vague. What did the Trumps do?

That was my question to you. It wasn’t vague at all. You were agreeing with Melania so I was wondering what actions you may have agreed with.

I agree with her that cyberbullying should not be allowed.

But when she said it it was an empty platitude since neither she nor her husband’s administration did anything to prevent cyber bullying. In fact, her husband was and still is one of the most prolific cyber bullies to ever exist.

Anyway, can you please address the topic: If you're online, then does your "online presence" change what is right and wrong for you morally speaking? It appears that for many people yes, since doing online what doing offline would get them into trouble, then they do it online to avoid punishment. If you want to express hatred for those who disagree with you, then do so over the internet because there you're likely to get away with it. Do you agree with that?

I agree that lots of people say and do things on the internet that they would not do in face-to-face interactions because they can hide behind the anonymity and distance provided by the internet.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I’m guessing that very few people adhere to a perfectly rigid moral system. As evidenced by how many people do things to others they wouldn’t want done to them or do things they know are wrong if they know they are unlikely to get caught. Everyone from petty criminals to full-fledged politicians.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Your question is vague. What did the Trumps do?

That was my question to you. It wasn’t vague at all. You were agreeing with Melania so I was wondering what actions you may have agreed with.

I agree with her that cyberbullying should not be allowed.

But when she said it it was an empty platitude since neither she nor her husband’s administration did anything to prevent cyber bullying. In fact, her husband was and still is one of the most prolific cyber bullies to ever exist.

Then it's unfortunate that the Trumps didn't do more to put a stop to cyberbullying. I don't wish to go down a political rabbit hole, though. Regardless of one's political views, I think we should treat people decently.

Anyway, can you please address the topic: If you're online, then does your "online presence" change what is right and wrong for you morally speaking? It appears that for many people yes, since doing online what doing offline would get them into trouble, then they do it online to avoid punishment. If you want to express hatred for those who disagree with you, then do so over the internet because there you're likely to get away with it. Do you agree with that?

I agree that lots of people say and do things on the internet that they would not do in face-to-face interactions because they can hide behind the anonymity and distance provided by the internet.

Is treating people badly online right or wrong?

I’m guessing that very few people adhere to a perfectly rigid moral system. As evidenced by how many people do things to others they wouldn’t want done to them or do things they know are wrong if they know they are unlikely to get caught. Everyone from petty criminals to full-fledged politicians.

You're avoiding answering my question. Are you in a dilemma?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Their mistreatment includes bullying in gangs, cursing out those with different or opposing views, insulting others, threats, and engaging in name-calling.

There's more to misbehaviors online than these categories, i.e. bullying as an individual, doxing, invasions of privacy, identity theft, shitposting, trolling, lots of other things.

Also, revenge porn and child porn.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I’m guessing that very few people adhere to a perfectly rigid moral system. As evidenced by how many people do things to others they wouldn’t want done to them or do things they know are wrong if they know they are unlikely to get caught. Everyone from petty criminals to full-fledged politicians.

You're avoiding answering my question. Are you in a dilemma?

Which question am I avoiding? I agreed with you earlier. And what dilemma are you imagining?