• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Does an online presence change morality?

Cyber bullying is mostly something that teenagers are guilty of and sometimes it's extreme. I grew up in the generation that was taught never to allow what others say about you, hurt you. I maintain that attitude to this day. And, if I felt as if I was being constantly insulted here, I'd simply leave. People sometimes do insult each other here, but it's far from what I would consider cyber bullying. Plus, all of us are grown up adults who should be able to take insults from time to time without acting as if we've been targeted with a crime.
You're obviously been downplaying the harassment I've encountered here. The bullies have disrupted all of my threads not just "time to time" but all of the time.
Do some research as to what teens do to each other when they are online. It's far worse than what happens here and yes, many states do have laws against this type of bullying. Despite the occasional insult, including the many times that US has insulted or projected his own problems on the rest of us, I wouldn't consider any of that as bullying.
If I actually did insult an innocent person here than I sincerely apologize. You're omitting the fact that if I have criticized anybody, then it's because of the way they've treated me. I've been insulted for merely having an unpopular opinion, and the insults have involved name calling and cursing. Never once did I engage in name calling, and I've never posted my cursing at anybody.
And US, nobody made an actual death threat towards you. What was said wasn't meant to be taken literally. It was simply a response to something insulting that you said. I would never have taken it literally.
I've been warned that I'm not allowed to comment on that incident.
For fucks's sake...
You know full well that that kind of language offends a lot of people. It offends me. So why do you do it if you want to make a case that I've been treated well here?
...none of us even know each other in real life. We don't know the address of each other. If I were to seriously threaten death to a person I know irl, that's making a terroristic threat in the state of Georgia and I could be arrested for that. That's not what happened here.
The laws against that kind of cyberbullying might well be changing. I'm hoping that the internet gets cleaned up and secured so that it can be used to freely exchange ideas in safety.
So, if you hate us so much and think most of us are bullies, I suggest that you consider leaving for the sake of your own mental health.
I actually like it here. I'm learning a lot about atheists despite all the invective--or maybe because of the invective.

But why don't you take your own advice? If you hate me and/or what I post, then don't read or post on any of my threads. It appears that that's not enough, and you don't want anybody reading what I have to say.
I doubt you will because you seem to enjoy clashing with others here. Just sayin'.
I do enjoy a lively debate. And did you notice that this is a discussion board? I'm here to discuss issues related to atheism, and that's just what I'm doing.

Before I go, did you get a chance to read Boy reportedly hangs self after bullies tell him to commit suicide? I think it's a good idea for everybody here to know what cyberbullying can do to people especially cyberbullying that involves encouraging suicide. [removed]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sick of the sturm and drang to this drawn-out drama, BUT, as long as a poster will come on board with the attitude of "I know things about you atheists that you won't admit to yourselves", he or she is just begging for sarcastic rebuttals. And maybe even, to go German again, schadenfreude. And here I am again, feeding the beast. How many chapters are left???
P.S. For fuck's sake!
 
I don't think you should commit suicide. There I said it.
You know full well that that's not what I asked. It's sick to play games over the tragedy of a young boy who hanged himself.
But while you're here can you at least make thoughtful, cogent arguments? No one can force you to, but freedom of speech is not freedom of consequence.
I did just that in the OP!

Again, please don't make a joke out of this tragic problem.
 
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.
The anonymous/pseudo-anonymous nature of the internet makes it easier to get away with misbehavior. It doesn't change what constitutes misbehavior.
 
I don't think you should commit suicide. There I said it.
You know full well that that's not what I asked. It's sick to play games over the tragedy of a young boy who hanged himself.
But while you're here can you at least make thoughtful, cogent arguments? No one can force you to, but freedom of speech is not freedom of consequence.
I did just that in the OP!

Again, please don't make a joke out of this tragic problem.
Why do you think I'm joking? You posted this sick OP asking for a discussion. Perhaps you shouldn't post something so tragic and then try and relate it to your experience here. Do you honestly want people to engage with you, or are you doing something that rhymes with bowling?

aa
 
The anonymous/pseudo-anonymous nature of the internet makes it easier to get away with misbehavior. It doesn't change what constitutes misbehavior.
Then why run a discussion board that's full of that misbehavior? I do hope you don't enjoy hurting people. The reason I use IIDB is to discuss issues related to atheism and other important subjects. I'm not here to hurt anyone.
Disagreeing with you isn't disrupting your threads.
No, but the incessant personal attacks are very disruptive. Why run a discussion board only to allow those who want to discuss relevant issues here to be abused?

Here's a very relevant video about cyberbullying: The Danger Of Internet | Cyberbullying | Online Harassment | Psychology Documentary. It mentions that people are fighting back against online bullies, and some of those bullies are doing jailtime. I do hope that you're aware as this video documents that being online does not lend complete anonymity. The authorities can follow the "digital trail" to investigate online offenders.
 
It's sick to play games over the tragedy of a young boy who hanged himself.

Your posts seem to take advantage of the suicide.
I've noticed that beside myself, nobody here has expressed any shock or remorse over the boy's suicide. About all I've seen is angry defensiveness.

Generally, posters here do not want to take advantage of his tragic death to promote narratives about themselves or you. That is an example of their good morals and character. Feel free to have the last word because I am not discussing that tragedy further.
 
It's sick to play games over the tragedy of a young boy who hanged himself.

Your posts seem to take advantage of the suicide.
I've noticed that beside myself, nobody here has expressed any shock or remorse over the boy's suicide. About all I've seen is angry defensiveness.

Generally, posters here do not want to take advantage of his tragic death to promote narratives about themselves or you. That is an example of their good morals and character. Feel free to have the last word because I am not discussing that tragedy further.
Nah--We all know the truth. Activities like those on this board can have tragic consequences.[removed]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe that moral principles are universal and apply to all situations, regardless of whether you're interacting online or offline. What's right is right, and what's wrong is wrong, no matter the context. The real challenge lies in discerning what's morally sound in each unique situation and ensuring we have the tools and unbiased individuals to uphold these ethical standards.

For instance, in the real world, it's considered wrong to physically or verbally assault someone. However, in a boxing ring, hitting someone is permitted, and verbal abuse is accepted in competitive rap battles. As you can see, the specific context of the interaction can influence what's deemed morally acceptable. Even in those real-world scenarios I've mentioned, assaults that are considered underhanded or illegal may well be unacceptable.

Another example of nuance is I understand that by registering on IIDB, I have acknowledged and agreed to not hold Internet Infidels accountable for any losses or damages, whether perceived or real. Given this agreement, would it be moral for me to expect a team of volunteers, who generously donate their personal time to IIDB without compensation, to shield me from losses or damages that I have explicitly waived IIDB's responsibility for?

From a moral standpoint, that might be considered unreasonable or unfair.

Another important thing to consider is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

Particularly:
"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."


This law protects online platforms, like social media sites, forums, and blogs, from being held responsible for most of the content posted by their users. That means if a user posts something illegal or defamatory on a platform, the platform itself can't be sued for that content.

There have been talks at different levels of government about changing Section 230, with some people saying that platforms should be more responsible for certain types of content or that the immunity shouldn't be as broad. As of now, there have been no changes made to Section 230 and the Supreme Court's interpretation still stands.

In my view, Section 230 should be applied with a more nuanced, case-by-case approach, rather than the current broad, hands-off policy. For instance, the protection offered to platforms by Section 230 should be contingent upon their cooperation VIA legal channels. in providing detailed records (within their abilities) about the content and its creators, particularly in instances of egregious violations. This at least offers aid to individuals in their pursuit of justice, potentially (though I'm doubtful) leading to a reduction in online bullying.
 
It's sick to play games over the tragedy of a young boy who hanged himself.

Your posts seem to take advantage of the suicide.
I've noticed that beside myself, nobody here has expressed any shock or remorse over the boy's suicide. About all I've seen is angry defensiveness.

Generally, posters here do not want to take advantage of his tragic death to promote narratives about themselves or you. That is an example of their good morals and character. Feel free to have the last word because I am not discussing that tragedy further.
Nah--We all know the truth. Activities like those on this board can have tragic consequences. If I was one of those who have advanced suicide on this board, I suppose I wouldn't want to face that truth either.
What the fuck! Nobody here has ever advanced suicide. Most of us support the legal right for one who is nearing the end of life and suffering endlessly, without much hope of relief, who's lives are nothing but misery, to have the legal right to be released from their suffering via voluntary euthanasia. ( and, you're not my mother, so enough with the word Fuck offends you. Too fucking bad. That word has been around forever and is readily accepted in secular society. Shit! Even all of my white Christian friends use it freely. It also has advantages in that it's often a way of relieving stress and frustration. Moving on......)


I don't hate you or anyone else in this place. I do find some people annoying, but not once have I put anyone on ignore. If you want to add me to the ignore list, know problem Bro. I don't get my little feelings hurt by someone on the internet. Disagreeing or arguing with someone isn't cyber bullying, nor are little insults for that matter, at least not when it comes to adults. Most people have been more than fair with you.

The big problem is parents allowing young teens to have smart phones. I read yesterday that over 70% of 12 year olds have their own smart phones. That's fucking nuts! Kids are becoming depressed and anxious from having too much screen time, especially on social media. Parents need to take some responsibility for what's happening. The writer of the article I read was a mental health professional who feels that teens should be at least 16 before having smart phones and joining social media. Perhaps that would help. Kids who are going through puberty are often the worst, when it comes to behaviors. Hormonal changes aren't always easy for kids. It's complicated.

Of course, it was wrong for kids to bully the 13 year old, likely leading him to commit suicide. That is as far as we know. They may have played a part, but this child may have already been struggling with depression, so I'd like to know why was a 13 year old permitted to have access to devices that allowed him to be bullied? Was he getting any help for his problems? What the other kids did was wrong, but they were fucking 13 years old! They were not adults, so they, imo, shouldn't be charged with a crime, They should be counseled, removed from social media, and assessed for their own mental health issues etc.This is a complicated problem, and it's also fucking nuts to compare how you've been treated or how you perceive you've been treated here, with the bullying of a 13 year old that killed himself. Persecution complex much? Just asking.

The only reason I've replied to you in the past was because I thought you could be reasoned with, but apparently I was wrong. This time I'm posting because I think it was outrageous of you to claim that posters here were advocating for suicide, when in fact, we were only advocating for compassion. Let me finish with an experience I had as a home health nurse around the year 2000. I was sent to visit a 97 year old Black man who lived with his daughter and her family in a little modest home. He had a G-tube, a Foley catheter, bed sores, heart problems and suffered from some symptoms of early dementia. He was totally dependent and sadly, even 20 years or so years ago, it was common for doctors to force tube feedings on people like him, making families feel guilty if they didn't allow the most aggressive end of life care. Most people didn't and probably don't have an Advanced Directive, stating what type of treatment they want at the end of life if they can't speak for themselves during that time. Whenever I pulled my car into my patient's driveway, I could hear the man screaming loudly saying: "Lordy, Lordy Lordy, Jesus. Take me now. Please God take me know!" It was heartbreaking to see him suffer, but I did the best I could to care for him, by sending in an aide and providing emotional support to his family. There was not much more I could do and since I wasn't his primary nurse, I don't know if anyone had asked about hospice for him, or if a doctor would even sign off on hospice for him, which would at least have given him some extra care and the right drugs when he started to transition. It bothered me greatly that anyone had to live that way. That is why I strongly support the right of individuals to have help ending their lives. The truth is they are ending their suffering as any semblance of a normal life has left them long ago. And, nobody is forcing this on anyone. If someone wants to continue to the end, regardless of their pain and suffering, I strongly support their right to do that as well. So, once again, you are either purposely making up shit about the posters here or you simply don't understand that most everyone here has plenty of empathy when a tragedy happens. We also have empathy for those who are suffering at the end of life and have no way out. Voluntary euthanasia isn't advocating for suicide. It's advocating for one's right to choose to have a little help when life becomes nothing but endless suffering. How dare you compare that to the suicide of a seemingly young healthy person that was likely instigated by a bunch of unruly kids who needed some guidance, in how to treat others!



But at the same time, when someone insults us or disagrees with us, we don't act as if we're being persecuted. I've argued and gotten mildly pissed at many posters here from time to time, but I don't hold a grudge. I've been misunderstood by more than just you, but it doesn't make me feel as if I've been attacked. It's fine for us to disagree about many things while still seeing the better qualities in each other. I'm done with this shit, well..... at least for now. :p

There you go. That's my opinion. I doubt you will listen to me, so maybe I've just given you one more drama reward in your search for attention. If that's the case, you're welcome. I hope you find a better purpose for your life than making insulting assumptions about people you really don't know. Just sayin'.
 
. So, once again, you are either purposely making up shit about the posters here

Bingo!



He does not give a rat’s ass about the kid who was bullied into suicide. He only raises the case to cynically exploit it as a prop for his own drama-queen feelings of martyrdom. It is beyond bizarre that he should liken the reactions he has received on this board to the cyber bullying that drove that kid to kill himself. And, of course, he is AGAIN slandering people here as having “advanced suicide.” This slur is false, and moreover I am sure he knows that. I have reported this already, so we’ll see if anything gets done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe that moral principles are universal and apply to all situations, regardless of whether you're interacting online or offline. What's right is right, and what's wrong is wrong, no matter the context. The real challenge lies in discerning what's morally sound in each unique situation and ensuring we have the tools and unbiased individuals to uphold these ethical standards.
According to a very interesting video I watched recently on cyberbullying, many people abuse others online out of simple sadism. They enjoy hurting others. What I've seen in this forum is very common on the internet. Heck, I've seen worse, believe it or not. It's all harassment and little substance. It seems to start when I make one little comment in passing which ends up in months of stalking. I'm not completely sure what sets people off, but I have noticed that those I correct can be especially vicious. Evidently many people use online forums to stalk, harass, and insult anybody whom they know holds ideas they cannot tolerate--especially when somebody can argue well for those ideas. If arguing appears to be destined for failure, cyberbullies turn to insults.

A big reason there are so many of these "cybercreeps" is that they know they can get away with murder. The mods turn a blind eye to their bullying, but if the bullied dares to strike back, rest assure that there will be at least a warning.

Let me close with a positive note. What bothers me most about the cesspool so many people have made the internet out to be is that it could be different. Online forums could be informative and helpful. Disagreements could be debated with respect. I remember I was in a forum long ago, and the subject matter dealt with home improvement. I started a thread asking why there are two types of screws. A gentleman who had obviously done a lot of that kind of work replied to my question. His answer was completely sensible, polite, and informative.

So it can be done.
 
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.


This debate board has multiple fora, with different rules.
Just like in society.

There are things you can say and do at the Jet Lagged Lizard that you cannot say or do at the Connaught.
Things that you cannot say and do if you have the Obamas over for dinner, but that are not a problem if it’s Buddy Hatfield or Sonny Landrieu.

Similarly, there is a set of rules for the “road to Nowhere” fora, and a stricter set for the World Issues or Religion fora, and a stricter set for the Science fora, and a very strict no-insults set of rules for Fireside Support.

This board values open discussion, but we have reserved corners of it for reliable support without attacks.

You have made several comments about moderation practices. I’ll say this (as a mod) for everyone to hear because it bears reminding: It is agains the TOU to make public discussions out of moderation activities. You have been told this, as have others. If you have something you need to clear up with moderation, start a thread in the “Private Feedback” forum. That’s what it’s there for. That is the ONLY place that it is okay to comment on or complain about moderation.

If people want to swear, there is no rule against it here, although I’m sure there are scripts you could write that will strip all swears from the content.

And yes, the mods are all volunteers here. We do not read every single thread, we use the report function to detect many of the issues. And no, we do not receive a single penny for the hours we put in cleaning up trash posts and trash quotes of trash posts that all of you know better than to press “submit” for in the first place. (FFS, stop reporting problem posts and then quoting them so we have two+ posts to clean up! There’s no OT in the budget!)

Mod hat off - just a poster now:
Yes people tend to have worse behavior when they feel anonymous. But this board is remarkably tame as far as the internet goes, and interesting discussions have been taking place for nigh 25 years now.
 
Let me close with a positive note. What bothers me most about the cesspool so many people have made the internet out to be is that it could be different. Online forums could be informative and helpful. Disagreements could be debated with respect. I remember I was in a forum long ago, and the subject matter dealt with home improvement. I started a thread asking why there are two types of screws. A gentleman who had obviously done a lot of that kind of work replied to my question. His answer was completely sensible, polite, and informative.

This was a truly enjoyable read. I'm sure many people out there agree with you (myself included).
 
Let me close with a positive note. What bothers me most about the cesspool so many people have made the internet out to be is that it could be different. Online forums could be informative and helpful. Disagreements could be debated with respect. I remember I was in a forum long ago, and the subject matter dealt with home improvement. I started a thread asking why there are two types of screws. A gentleman who had obviously done a lot of that kind of work replied to my question. His answer was completely sensible, polite, and informative.

This was a truly enjoyable read. I'm sure many people out there agree with you (myself included).
Thanks. To clean up the internet and make it a safe environment for everybody will take some doing. I've decided to investigate some options of my own in the near future. Aside from having online discussion boards overseen by law enforcement agencies, we could develop a ratings system in which web sites are evaluated for their content.
 
Back
Top Bottom