anonrerising

so you're saying that

if someone stole art, or scammed players, or IDK is racist or something

and people can prove that, and send proof

their... post should just be deleted because it's affecting their mental health? huh?

so ... no one should know about the not great things they did because their mental health took a nose dive as soon as people started hearing about their bad behavior?

interesting....... take........

I will say yea, actual crime evidence shouldn't be deleted... I'm with you there.

But their whole "We're not responsible for harassment facilitated by our blog" brings me back to the last attempt at one of these.

i totally agree that drama blogs in general do facilitate drama in of themselves

but truly no one can control what other people are doing

it's so weird to see a report source blamed for calling out bad behavior because other people decided to harass the subject

like it's just such a weird mindset to say that no one can be called out on their bad behavior, and the evidence of their bad behavior should be deleted, because unrelated people are interacting with the subject

like IDK maybe if you don't want to be bothered in relation to your shitty actions, don't do those shitty actions in the first place???? don't scam people, don't be racist, etc etc etc

i do agree that there are pretty stupid and petty things that people get called out for on fr though. i'm mostly talking in relation to legitimate scammers and thieves that you know people might want to avoid playing with

Yes. I'm saying no one should be driven closer to killing themselves. Yes. I'm saying someone's mental health is more important than being able to jerk off to drama.

Genuinely asking this - what about people who aren’t reading drama blogs to ‘jerk off to drama’, but read them so they know to avoid certain people? Such as people with (documented and provable) racist, homo/transphobic, etc. views, or scammers, or worse? If those people contact a drama blog to get posts about them removed because they claim they’re getting harassed as a result, that proof of their actions disappears - so people who don’t want to deal with bigots and don’t want to get scammed, and are using these blogs as a Beware of sorts (and not harassing anyone or doing anything outside of blocking said users) may not be aware of such users. Where does the line get drawn between protecting a shitty person from the consequences of their actions, and allowing people to protect themselves from said person? Doesn’t their mental health matter, too?

To be clear - I’m not talking about petty shit like So-and-so is so annoying in FRD, or That person types weird, or This accent artist is boring or whatever. I mean posts about people that address genuinely shitty behaviors that actually can affect other people. I don’t care if a Suggestions regular gets a post taken down about them being a jerk in general or whatever, but I’d like to know if, for example, some circle of users is sharing some vile and racist shit in a discord (as has happened), so I can block and avoid those people. That’s the primary reason I’m hanging out on drama blogs in the first place, and I’m betting it’s the same for at least a few others.

If the posts are resulting in those people being told to kill themselves, death threats, stalking, people digging up info to doxx them... then yeah, I still stand by what I said.

It's kind of fucked up how little drama-lovers can care about actual mental health. Irony from someone like me frequenting a drama site, but at least I don't condone suicide baiting (as in, baiting people to commit suicide) just so people can block a stranger on the internet they'll never meet.

How recursive does this get? If someone is a known stalker / suicide baiter / doxxer, should proof of their actions not be posted because of the possibility of them being harassed in turn?

I want to be clear that I'm not in favor of those things happening, even to someone who has done them themself, but I think there's a certain point where protecting innocent bystanders is more important than protecting someone from the consequences of their own actions.

I think the problem is that people don't know when to stop. How many times have we all seen a pile on over something that most people would regard as trivial. I think we often forget that some of the people getting dragged on these drama blogs are teenagers with very little life experience and brains that aren't fully formed yet. Of course we shouldn't allow people to stalk, suicide bait, or dox people. Those are actual crimes.

I don’t think people should be harassing or suicide baiting even shitty racists, but I also don’t want to end up dealing with them on the site - I just want to block them so I never have to deal with them, even if they are just strangers in the internet I’ll never meet. (Which is a weird take - We’re still able to communicate with each other over the internet. Like, we still affect one another with our words? We don’t turn into emotionless robots the second we log on.) And I still don’t wanna sell dragons to them or have them message me.

Basically, I wanna know the usernames of shitbags so I can block them and never have to deal with them. If people are telling those users to kill themselves, frankly I’d also like to know so I can block them as well. Both types of people are terrible and I want nothing to do with them.

In this scenario you’re advocating for the mental health of bigots (who themselves wish harm on people) while ignoring the mental health of those of us who just want a heads up so we can avoid said bigots. It just seems hypocritical.

this is a good point. since the new blog seems to have a category of transgressions they consider Real Shit, they could just say they won't delete posts related to that. the blanket statement of not deleting any posts is what's really an issue.

Oh, I’m in full agreement that when it comes to inconsequential stuff, it’s better to remove it if something gets out of hand. I fully support adjusting the rules to allow a bit more consideration in that regard. But the anon up above is saying that ALL posts should be removed if the subject contacts them, regardless of what the subject said or did.

My view point is that it’s not a drama blogs fault if people reading it take things too far, but it’s the considerate thing to do to remove posts that result in harassment IF said posts are just minor crap. But I think that if the posts are about someone scamming/conning people, harassing people, or just being hateful and bigoted in general, then people deserve to know about that to take steps to protect themselves from that person. Like, if someone gets posted about for saying transphobic things and wants that post taken down because they say they’re getting hate mail. I don’t condone the harassment, but if it comes down to protecting the mental health of a transphobe versus the mental health of trans folks, well - sorry, but I’m choosing the latter.

Also, removing posts isn’t going to stop someone harassing someone else once they decide to do it and get their likeminded friends in on it. And unless the original anon is suggesting drama blogs shouldn’t exist at all (which is another topic entirely), there’s no way for any blog to stop that from happening even if they do delete it.

Can I be honest? I just hate the feeling of We're not responsible for what we post and what people do with it. If you run a drama blog, you are responsible for what you post. End sentence. By running it, you are stating you know the consequences and are willing to deal with that. You can't just handwave and say "they did it, not my fault".

And if it gets out of hand, I'm fairly sure Tumblr would hold the blog runner responsible.

DA

I agree with you. Running a drama site/blog requires responsibility, and they aren't taking any. Not only are they willing to potentially cause major harm by leaving posts up, but they don't seem to care about potential legal repercussions.

If someone is seriously harmed by a post that was purposefully left up, people can report that to authorities. Tumblr can turn over information to authorities too if deemed serious enough. Having that policy up is gonna be evidence if such thing happens, and the law isn't gonna go easy on them if they see it.

It's not worth hurting someone or getting into legal trouble for some salt y'all.

Lets rephase this imaginary scenario that you've come up with in your head. A newspaper publishes a truthful story about a crime an individual was proven to have done. A group of people read the newspaper and decide that they want to harass the individual due to those actions. This individual harms themself as a result.

Do you really think that the newspaper is the one going to get in trouble here? Not the people actually doing the illegal act of harassment?

I don't disagree with some of the moral arguments being discussed in this thread but I think it's really ridiculous to act like a tumblr blog about flightrising drama is going to get anyone in legal trouble. In particular when they're not doing anything illegal. Against Tumblr TOS? Probably. But there are tons of drama blogs related to pet sites hosted on Tumblr and nothing ever gets done about those.

DA

Yeknow, I agree with the other anon. Newspaper outlets have legal teams to protect themselves, due to high coverage of crime stories (so does tumblr but they aren't newspaper typically), but yeknow who doesn't? People that run drama blogs, they likely don't have the funding for it.

If someone were to be seriously injured or dies, and there's clear evidence that the source was from harassing messages, which originated from a drama blog, what do you do? Investigate the harassers *and* the drama blog. The policy is evidence and doesn't look stellar.

It's not that farfetched. Investigators have to cover every little thing, and that includes the blog, yeknow? Posts might not break tos itself, so tumblr might not remove them, but it could still lead to some really crappy things happening, especially when you consider alot of the players of FR (many vulnerable crowds). The behavior of people is what could land them in trouble. People like to act like lemmings sometimes.

They can sue or investigate all they want, they're gonna have a hard time proving any fault, especially if said blog makes it clear they don't condone action outside of the blog. Tumblr and Dreamwidth itself would likely be covered under Section 230 - I'm not a lawyer, but I could see an argument being made for a submissions-based blog as well.

If the moderators of ARR or SMR or any new blogs were posting or allowing submissions that directed action against a user or provided private information (like telling people to send them messages, or posting their address, or so on), then maybe they'd be argued to have some culpability. But if we're just talking about someone sending in a screenshot of Username8374 from Earth saying some dumb shit in public on the forums or in a Discord server, and going 'look at this idiot' - I highly doubt there'd be much to pursue against the blog in such a case, even if someone decided on their own to be a nitwit and start bothering Username8374. Especially if it's a post with proof of whatever the user said or did, and can't be argued as a defamation case.

There's a discussion to be had about the morality of not removing such posts, sure - but legally speaking, I'd be surprised to see the blogs themselves get in any trouble.

not one of the other anons that actually wrote about it in any of these threads, but i've attempted too, and i had a note outlining why, and named the original dr in it. in my case, it only took one hateful message to send 14 year old me over the edge. those anons actually have some ground to stand on. it was basically a "hey [player from flight] has a strange fest submission, i don't think it fits the theme" and i'll admit, it didn't fit the flight theme, looking back. but there was no reason for someone send me a hateful message talking about my submission after that post went up. once you throw hate speech into the mix, then section 230 doesn't protect them anymore, since hate speech is a crime.

Let me preface this by saying that I am genuinely sorry you went through that - you didn't deserve to be harassed over something like that, and I truly hope you're in a better place and have a support network.

That said, something like that wouldn't fall under hate speech - hate speech is generally going to be on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. And as unfair as it may seem, even hate speech is protected to a degree by the First Amendment (I am speaking of American law here - I don't know how it would be handled in other countries) and Section 230 still provides protection to the platform it's posted to (as well as allowing the moderation and removal of said speech without repercussion.) What was originally posted to DR wasn't hate speech - people are allowed to express their opinions or criticism.

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2023-02-18 03:53 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2023-02-18 04:50 (UTC) - Expand

Just because you aren't charged with a crime or held legally responsible for something, doesn't mean that there aren't any consequences. Investigations are invasive. And lets be real, if we're debating the morality of whether drama blog owners are responsible when someone is harassed, you can bet your ass the general public will have an opinion. Reputations can't always be repaired.

Anyone can say, "I'm not a lawyer, but this is covered under section blah blah blah." You still need someone to actually make that case for you if it goes to court. Whether you are in the wrong or not, that fight is going to require a lawyer. That means time and money.

Obviously this whole conversation is hypothetical, but that's a whole lot of hypothetical shit that can impact your real life...and all for the sake of hosting yet another pit for people to fling garbage into.

There are lawyers who would take a case like that pro-bono just out of principal - people really love the First Amendment. And that's assuming Tumblr/Dreamwidth/Whatever is obligated to turn over information on the (anonymous) blog operators in the first place - which would require a reasonable legal precedent. 'This blog posts mean things' isn't going to be enough to get that. An investigator worth their salt isn't going to waste their time on things they know are already a dead end.

The original discussion wasn't even about the legal risks of running drama blogs, it was about the moral obligation to remove or keep up a post someone wanted removed. There's hypothetical risks in everything - I could be run over by a car tomorrow, but I'm still gonna leave my house anyway, because I can logically consider how likely that risk actually is. If someone is worried about the extremely unlikely hypothetical legal risks of running a drama blog, they probably wouldn't be running one in the first place.

Dreamwidth and Tumblr are absolved because the law was put into place because they can't vet each submission before posting. A blog that reads and decides what to post is different.

Also, I'm more on morality and possibly getting the Tumblr banned.

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2023-02-18 16:31 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2023-02-18 16:42 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2023-02-18 16:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2023-02-18 18:25 (UTC) - Expand

"I don’t condone the harassment, but if it comes down to protecting the mental health of a transphobe versus the mental health of trans folks, well - sorry, but I’m choosing the latter."

I think an area where this gets tricky is what do people consider problematic? Sure, a lot of transphobia (and other bigotry) is totally obvious, but I'm sure we all know how there's many points of contention in social justice spaces.

Here's some examples: some people consider using the words "stupid" or "crazy" to be ableist hate speech. Others believe that if someone doesn't actively speak up against something, they're a bigot. For example, this came up once on a Discord I moderated: someone recommended a book, then someone else said that the book had racist content. The person replied "Yeah, I know." The person who complained that the book had racist content came to the mod team and asked us to admonish the person for downplaying the racism in the book and worried that they were a bigot. In another space, someone was called out as queerphobic for expressing concern that the proliferation of labels and emphasis on finding the perfect specific label can hinder a person's identity development and well-being.

Any of us who has spent time in these spaces can probably come up with a bunch more examples. It's obvious that nuance is lost in a lot of these discussions and "bigot" is thrown around as an ad hominem attack instead of actually figuring out what a person believes.

In this situation, it would be up to the people who run the blog to determine what's problematic and what's not, and that situation gets sticky fast. I'm not saying they should or shouldn't delete posts, just that it's not always clear what's going on in any given situation, and it's certainly likely that someone could be labeled as bigoted when they aren't, especially given that the FR audience has many young teens who have exposure to toxic social justice-oriented spaces.

And on that note, even if a young teen says something bigoted, I don't think they should receive harassment. 14-year-olds say all kinds of dumb shit, sometimes just parroted from adults in their life, and I'd hate to see an actual child's mental health be negatively affected. They do not have the perspective, resources, and coping mechanisms most adults do.

I don’t disagree with you - the mods are very likely to have a different view from me about what’s considered ‘bad’ enough that it should be left up. In my case, I’m talking about straight up, undeniable racism, transphobia, etc. - using racial slurs, saying they don’t associate with LGBT people, mocking entire ethnic groups - all things I’ve seen posted about. Stuff that isn’t really gray-area or about semantics over labels or anything like that. You’re right that they may take a less firm stance that I won’t end up agreeing with.

But I’m not here to suggest where they should draw that line. I don’t actually have a firm opinion on whether they should loosen or keep their rule in regards to removing posts - if they decide to remove any post when asked or only certain ones, that’s up to them. I was more so arguing against the original notion that there’s never going to be a reason NOT to remove a post if someone is claiming harassment, because I believe there are times it serves the greater good to leave something up. Of course, my mileage may vary from yours as to when those times are. I think at a minimum there’s an argument to be made for leaving up posts about known scammers, if nothing else.

As I said before, I don’t condone any form of harassment, no matter how bad the person is - I just disagree that a drama blog is to blame for someone else’s behavior. You’re right that kids say dumb shit. But if you’re old enough to be on FR in the first place, you’re old enough to understand that a) there are consequences to your actions and b) what you post online has the potential to be there forever. We should all be careful with what we put online. Kids shouldn’t be harassed because they’re naive or ignorant about a topic or just word something poorly, no - but they also don’t get a pass on actual shitty behavior and beliefs just because they’re minors.

If I’m being honest, I don’t really even see the need for another FR drama blog - between ARR and SMR I feel like all the bases are covered (DRR is a cesspool that I’m surprised is even still standing, but I guess it’s also there for those who like that.) I prefer ARR, but I’m not that bothered by SMR really - I could do without the non-drama related scrying and dream posts and 28 copypasta jokes in a row, and topics definitely get dragged on far too long there. But for that last thing, I think the new salt blog owners are going to find themselves running into the same issue no matter how hard they try to avoid it. We just love beating dead horses.

Speaking of, as intense and long-winded as this discussion ended up being, I do wonder how often people are even actually asking to have a post removed.

on drama places theres a gradient between documenting harmful actions someone has taken and turning someone into a lolcow just because people have gone bitch-eating-crackers about them. lets not act like drama sites arent responsible for calculable harm on that far side of the gradient.

Seriously, +1. The other nonny's argument has been done to death when talking about sites like Kiwifarms. "We're just documenting what people have done~" while also facilitating a breeding ground of festering harassment. Sure, they have a rule "don't touch the Lolcow", so does that make them not responsible for people who do?

Yes, they're responsible. Anyone whose response to someone getting told to kill themselves isn't to remove the reason, then that person is responsible. The internet isn't a fucking federal court.

Hey.

Re: SA

DA

Re: DA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA