Login

russian armor

Cyberbullying Legislation In Poland

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (4)down
Phy
27 Aug 2016, 09:45 AM
#21
avatar of Phy

Posts: 509 | Subs: 1

#freeBarton :snfBarton:
27 Aug 2016, 10:20 AM
#22
avatar of scratchedpaintjob
Donator 11

Posts: 1021 | Subs: 1

barton stepped to far this time, therefore i think that relic should ban him. he will probably make a new account and buy the game again, but getting all the commanders back will be a costly lesson for him.

but i also got to say that wada responded in the most unintelligent way imaginable, but that has been discussed in the other thread already


27 Aug 2016, 11:07 AM
#23
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

Through the years Barton managed to troll so many people in this community its not even possible to count them. In fact, wada is the first that can't cope with it, you can answer yourself who seems to be more problematic then.

Just look at the example of hans, back in the time there were many people watching his stream mostly becouse he became so angry after loosing. Some also happened to streamsnipe him to trigger the reaction they wanted to see. But did hans say he is going leave community or denounce them? No. He continued to improve his play and now streamsniping him is not so beneficial becouse he is just hard to win against. He also worked on his anger and now its not that easy to trigger him.

I hope wada will become a man and chooses similar route to hans.
27 Aug 2016, 11:32 AM
#24
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3597 | Subs: 1

Through the years Barton managed to troll so many people in this community its not even possible to count them. In fact, wada is the first that can't cope with it, you can answer yourself who seems to be more problematic then.

Barton, everytime.

There are two sad things in this story, Barton still harassing random people after son many years and other people responding that's not a problem, giving full support to his behavior.

27 Aug 2016, 11:43 AM
#25
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Aug 2016, 11:32 AMEsxile

Barton, everytime.

There are two sad things in this story, Barton still harassing random people after son many years and other people responding that's not a problem, giving full support to his behavior.



Well, support is too much to say, there is no support from my side, I just fail to see any problem with what he does.

Come on, this is war game community, not kindergarden, nobody should cry when offended.
27 Aug 2016, 12:38 PM
#26
avatar of RandomName

Posts: 431

Who are you guys, the internet police?
27 Aug 2016, 13:09 PM
#27
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3597 | Subs: 1



Well, support is too much to say, there is no support from my side, I just fail to see any problem with what he does.

Come on, this is war game community, not kindergarden, nobody should cry when offended.


This where you are wrong, people have right to cry when offended. This is not yours or mine to say nothing happens, be strong, that's just a troll so shut up. Countries have laws to deal with this kind of situation for a good reasons, being on internet doesn't mean the laws suddenly disappear.

And yes, you are giving 100% support with your attitude.

Just think once, if Wada decides to do something terrible wrong with himself -because you can't say that never going to happen you are not in his head after all, the police will take the forum logs as evidence and what will they see: they'll see a bunch of guys who didn't help, who minored the issue, who reported the fault over Wada himself etc...

Seems ridiculous? maybe because you never faced such situation before. You can be charge for your comments.
27 Aug 2016, 14:16 PM
#28
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Aug 2016, 13:09 PMEsxile


This where you are wrong, people have right to cry when offended. This is not yours or mine to say nothing happens, be strong, that's just a troll so shut up. Countries have laws to deal with this kind of situation for a good reasons, being on internet doesn't mean the laws suddenly disappear.

And yes, you are giving 100% support with your attitude.

Just think once, if Wada decides to do something terrible wrong with himself -because you can't say that never going to happen you are not in his head after all, the police will take the forum logs as evidence and what will they see: they'll see a bunch of guys who didn't help, who minored the issue, who reported the fault over Wada himself etc...

Seems ridiculous? maybe because you never faced such situation before. You can be charge for your comments.


Not ridiculous at all. I'm working in justice and I can say that such kind of internet trolling can lead to serious problems and it's quite common.

Second thing, not in this matter about Barton and Wada but in general, behavior of people here is beyond my understanding. Thick skin? Don't stream? Wtf is this? If I want to play football with a friend but everytime I do, there are few guys who take a ball and smash it far away constantly I guess I should just get thicker skin or stop playing football in this place, aye?
The answer is no. I have a right to play here/I have a right to stream but no one has a right to bully. Case closed.
Go back with your "thicker skin" and use a brain. Not all of us have a thick skin and don't care about other people. We react in different way and in this case it's not Wada's problem.
27 Aug 2016, 14:23 PM
#29
avatar of The_Mad_Hat

Posts: 22



Not ridiculous at all. I'm working in justice and I can say that such kind of internet trolling can lead to serious problems and it's quite common.

Second thing, not in this matter about Barton and Wada but in general, behavior of people here is beyond my understanding. Thick skin? Don't stream? Wtf is this? If I want to play football with a friend but everytime I do, there are few guys who take a ball and smash it far away constantly I guess I should just get thicker skin or stop playing football in this place, aye?
The answer is no. I have a right to play here/I have a right to stream but no one has a right to bully. Case closed.
Go back with your "thicker skin" and use a brain. Not all of us have a thick skin and don't care about other people. We react in different way and in this case it's not Wada's problem.


+1
27 Aug 2016, 14:55 PM
#30
avatar of FichtenMoped
Editor in Chief Badge
Patrion 310

Posts: 4785 | Subs: 3



Not ridiculous at all. I'm working in justice and I can say that such kind of internet trolling can lead to serious problems and it's quite common.

Second thing, not in this matter about Barton and Wada but in general, behavior of people here is beyond my understanding. Thick skin? Don't stream? Wtf is this? If I want to play football with a friend but everytime I do, there are few guys who take a ball and smash it far away constantly I guess I should just get thicker skin or stop playing football in this place, aye?
The answer is no. I have a right to play here/I have a right to stream but no one has a right to bully. Case closed.
Go back with your "thicker skin" and use a brain. Not all of us have a thick skin and don't care about other people. We react in different way and in this case it's not Wada's problem.


+1
27 Aug 2016, 16:02 PM
#32
avatar of Jaedrik

Posts: 446 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Aug 2016, 06:34 AMWygrif


How is Wada estopped from arguing that he's being harassed? Has he done similar things to Barton? I think you could make a fair-ish assumption of the risk argument, but IIRC that wouldn't really apply if we're talking about an intentional tort.

The state sues people all the time, and rightly so in a common law context. More often than not in my experience, its not really about the money or an individual conviction so much as the principle of law. Besides which, cyberharassment is a real thing which really should be penalized. I'm not familiar enough with the Wada-Barton beef to really say much about whether it qualifies. TBF I doubt that it does. But I do know prosecutors who have dealt with suicides resulting from extremes of this kind of behavior, so yeah, there really does have to be a tool in the toolkit to deal with it.


You're right on the estoppel front. I should've just said easement. I was thinking of trying to combine the two into something like implicit consent, which I should normally revile. I mean, I don't think the state is a legitimate institution at all because its premise and existence violate the natural law. Tacit consent via the social contract theory doesn't hold up to argument by analogy. Besides all that, it's incredibly dangerous: the incentive for these incredibly small incidents is either make the prosecution financially worthwhile or completely ignore it, and I hope we'd agree that neither of those would be just outcomes. One punishment is far too much, the other too little.
Again, since you seem to have missed it: "The pivotal question for me is what degree of psychological harassment actually breaks the non-aggression principle, or rather the natural negative right to not be aggressed against? I'm pretty sure it's "there is no degree," because nobody is truly forced to be beholden to the words of another. As Marcus Aurelius said, 'they're just words my nigga.' Anyways, if someone thinks they are so beholden then they are mentally enslaving themselves, and that is no fault of the other."
This does depend much upon intent from both sides. I'd argue a tort common law system of private justice (like the ol' merry Brits had for a loooong time) would have these questions in mind: could Barton reasonably expect some harm to come out of this, and is Wada's grief and psychological damage genuine? No clear answers to these, which is why it's a common law system: we can't get perfection (Earth isn't paradise) but we can get closest with this system.
27 Aug 2016, 16:06 PM
#33
avatar of spectre645

Posts: 90

I must admit. I love wadas rage fits during the stream as i find them absolutely hilarious. Barton got a some good laughs out of wada. but wada has actually asked rather nicely for barton to stop. That means barton has taken it too far and should extend the professional courtesy of respecting wadas feelings and putting an end to the harassment.

This is the major issue that all you people crying "get a thick skin" dont understand. It is no longer fun for wada and he wants it to stop, why is that such a difficult thing to understand?
27 Aug 2016, 16:11 PM
#34
avatar of Uzmanoy

Posts: 106

.!. :snfBarton:



Deal with it :romeoPro:
27 Aug 2016, 17:52 PM
#35
avatar of Jaedrik

Posts: 446 | Subs: 2



Not ridiculous at all. I'm working in justice and I can say that such kind of internet trolling can lead to serious problems and it's quite common.

Second thing, not in this matter about Barton and Wada but in general, behavior of people here is beyond my understanding. Thick skin? Don't stream? Wtf is this? If I want to play football with a friend but everytime I do, there are few guys who take a ball and smash it far away constantly I guess I should just get thicker skin or stop playing football in this place, aye?
The answer is no. I have a right to play here/I have a right to stream but no one has a right to bully. Case closed.
Go back with your "thicker skin" and use a brain. Not all of us have a thick skin and don't care about other people. We react in different way and in this case it's not Wada's problem.

Your analogy faces a serious problem: One's interior disposition is not a thing people can handle (as a football) in a normative sense (standard, by literally opening one's skull and removing parts of his brain). One cannot expect someone to have such a fragile ego, and one should not: people should be encouraged towards mental stability and away from emotional dependence on other people. That is not beyond understanding, aye? Anyways, please don't mistake this for me meaning that Barton did no wrong, but he didn't do wrong in the sense you seem to think.
27 Aug 2016, 18:07 PM
#36
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Aug 2016, 17:52 PMJaedrik

Your analogy faces a serious problem: One's interior disposition is not a thing people can handle (as a football) in a normative sense (standard, by literally opening one's skull and removing parts of his brain). One cannot expect someone to have such a fragile ego, and one should not: people should be encouraged towards mental stability and away from emotional dependence on other people. That is not beyond understanding, aye? Anyways, please don't mistake this for me meaning that Barton did no wrong, but he didn't do wrong in the sense you seem to think.


It was just an example I picked among infinity others.

You are right, one cannot expect that someone may have fragile ego, but if person realizes that this someone has a fragile ego and it hurts that person, then he should stop unless he is somekind of idiot who enjoys hurting others and consider this as a fun.

If I call someone cunt/fucker/whatever (I don't know very offensive words in english lel), one will laugh and move forward but other can take it deep and for such person, if that kind of behavior continues, it's not healthy and it shows how stupid must be person who enjoys that.
27 Aug 2016, 18:33 PM
#37
avatar of WhySooSerious

Posts: 1248



Not ridiculous at all. I'm working in justice and I can say that such kind of internet trolling can lead to serious problems and it's quite common.

Second thing, not in this matter about Barton and Wada but in general, behavior of people here is beyond my understanding. Thick skin? Don't stream? Wtf is this? If I want to play football with a friend but everytime I do, there are few guys who take a ball and smash it far away constantly I guess I should just get thicker skin or stop playing football in this place, aye?
The answer is no. I have a right to play here/I have a right to stream but no one has a right to bully. Case closed.
Go back with your "thicker skin" and use a brain. Not all of us have a thick skin and don't care about other people. We react in different way and in this case it's not Wada's problem.


tbh in my opinion if a grown ass adult can be hurt by random person on the internet you already have issues.
27 Aug 2016, 18:37 PM
#38
avatar of WhySooSerious

Posts: 1248

Also a side note is that cyberbullying laws are rarely enforced unless it is occurring to a young adolescent. This is most likely because it is seen as ridiculous for it to happen to an adult.
27 Aug 2016, 18:40 PM
#39
avatar of RealName

Posts: 276

Damn, I know barton's an a-hole and that he at least deserves a ban, but taking it to court is
27 Aug 2016, 18:42 PM
#40
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



tbh in my opinion if a grown ass adult can be hurt by random person on the internet you already have issues.


That's the thing. I have no problems with this. People threaten me on daily basis so I give a solid fuck about this :sibHyena:
But not everyone is like me or you. Every person has a right to be hurt, even on the Internet.
You may not feel like this but you must understand other person.


Also a side note is that cyberbullying laws are rarely enforced unless it is occurring to a young adolescent. This is most likely because it is seen as ridiculous for it to happen to an adult.


But you don't need any "cyber-laws". Simple penal/civil code is enough for actions taken in the Internet.
PAGES (4)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

512 users are online: 512 guests
17 posts in the last 24h
44 posts in the last week
100 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44647
Welcome our newest member, Vassarh9
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM