Quantcast

«

»

Aug 01 2013

Level 3 is “annoying”

The campaign to pretend that the BBC libeled some of the people on oolon’s block bot continues. People are working each other into a frenzy on Twitter and Facebook, pretending that they were named on Newsnight and then called abusers. Not what happened. No one was named.

Gavin Esler and Paul Mason discuss it.

 

34 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    bcmystery

    If being labeled annoying is libel, I’ve got a case against pretty much everyone who has ever known me.

    Whoo-hoo! I’ll be rich!

  2. 2
    Anthony K

    What happened to “false accusations of [insert type of harassment/abuse/crime] hurt the real victims of [insert type of harassment/abuse/crime]” that was so popular with certain folk just a short while ago? That’s no longer trending among the kool kids?

  3. 3
    Stephanie Zvan

    Anthony, I think that’s taken a brief holiday until people can forget Ashley Paramore’s video.

  4. 4
    AJ Milne

    This really looks to me like it’s the same old stupid thing.

    I mean, the upshot is: they’re on a list called ‘annoying’. Real impact of that: people who choose to subscribe just won’t hear their noise. They can talk if they like; it’s just not arriving, if the same people opt for the same…

    Hrm… Funny thing, seems to me that’s pretty reasonable. And look what they’re effectively getting if they can claim this system is somehow ‘unfair’…

    I mean, call me suspicious, but I don’t really buy this ‘oh, now we’re associated with the far more scary people on those other lists’ complaint. Different lists, people. I don’t think this should be a complicated concept… What, would they like the developers perhaps to roll out multiple apps, maybe run different scripts for them and the potentially violent? Or hey, run the same one, but with a different DB, and maybe just give each app a different name? Would this, perhaps, soothe their fee-fees?

    Honestly, I think it’s just one more convenient excuse for a whinge, and I think under that it’s just the same old thing: they think there should be some kind of obligation on the part of the harassees to be harassed, and by them, and they’re angling to get the world to work that way, any way they can. It’s not about the ‘right to free speech’; it’s more their invented obligation of anyone in the world they might wish to annoy to pick up the phone when they demand and be properly annoyed.

    And y’know, it’s funny, but not so much funny ha ha: it’s one of the things has always pissed me off royally about one of the media lines you’re always getting about the gnus et al: that we’re so terribly combative, in your face, ‘cos listen:

    Listen, I can’t speak for all so self-identified, but I sure as hell do not consider it my right to call up rabbi or priest or imam y or even believer Z and declaim their gods are fictions, their religions are frequently rather cruel manipulations of human cognitive vulnerabilities, or whatever. They want to come to the places, virtual or not, where that’s the subject we generally do and where I talk about the same, and where people are genuinely working through how true or not that is, yeah, they sure are going to find I think they’ve precious little right to set the boundaries of discussion–especially considering a history in which the game has been for centuries to forbid it entirely–but I’m not coming to them, demanding they hear, not at all requiring their presence or acknowledgement. There are places that are safe to say this, that you don’t go to jail if the cops find out you said this anywhere at all (and by the way, there are jurisdictions where that’s just how it is, and communities where it’s damned close), and you can, in fact, say that in public, okay, that will do nicely.

    My point: this isn’t true about the gnus, generally, far as I know, notwithstanding the picture I think a lot of folk who’d like genuinely to silence them are trying to paint. Maybe there’s some figure they should have that right, but all I ever asked was that right to say it… And listen, lots of places, even that’s miles from how it really is right now, and lots of places people do try to find excuses (as limp, seems to me, as these jerks’ excuses for carping about this list, by the way) to silence anything they can…

    So yeah, these folk, now, they’re really something else. It looks to me like they figure that’s really how it should be. Not just their right to speak, but your obligation to listen, even if they go on and on and on and spam you to hell with constant and very direct sniping against you, personally. Indeed, you have no right to choose not to listen, anywhere whatsoever. This isn’t even a public square thing, like, say a billboard: it’s your personal account, and you’re just saying: thanks, no; consider this an opt out; no flyers, please… And even this, somehow, well, this won’t do. Somehow they figure: you’ve not even that right. They’re talking to you. How dare you ignore them? Seriously, it’s like the junk mail people insisting: you have to open the envelopes. All of them. Also, there’s a quiz, to make sure you read it, and you’d better pass. You put me on a list of do not open, dang, people are going to think I’m the unabomber, from your other list, or somethin’…

    Pretty spectacularly obnoxious, really. So I get to thinking I’ve been asking far too little. Who’s got the Vatican’s phone number? Imma call the pope. And that bastard better not try to hang up until I figure I’m done, or I will call my lawyer.

  5. 5
    oolon

    LOL, reading the comments above, AJ Milnes ” I don’t really buy this ‘oh, now we’re associated with the far more scary people on those other lists’ complaint” … Everyone who wants to be crucified on level1 raise your hands!

  6. 6
    AJ Milne

    Re #5, heh.

    Come to think of it, I figure that’s gonna be the next thing: the level one ‘nyms complaining…

    Sure, it’ll be: ‘Hey! What the hell? I’m very unimpressed with who they let into this neighbourhood…

    ‘I mean, look, I’m foul, I am. Rape threats, death threats, graphic, personal, nasty… I post pictures of people’s houses, whole deal…

    ‘So how dare you lump me in with mere spammers?! I’m pissed, pal!’

  7. 7
    MessageUpdate1

    Oh dear, Ophelia. Looks like you’ve got egg on your face now.

    Facts eh, a bit uncomfortable for your agenda! It was libel (you should know having squeamed and squeamed about libel) and the BBC have a series of complaints to go through. You must be SO PROUD of your child-porn snapshot downloading friend James Billingham.

    YOU are an ABUSER. YOU have victim blamed the women who were placed on that bot after being BULLIED AND HARASSED by you and your friends, ie. people such as EllenBeth Wachs. Oolon has admitted people are on the list for reasons such as BEING BORING, and yet you class that as ABUSIVE?

    As a result, a bot is being established and Tweeter users guilty of abusing women (YOU, and other FTB peeps), supporting people who make threats of violence (that includes YOU and Stephanie Zvan), and other misdemeanours, are going to be put on that list whether they like it or not. Oolon will be added as well, given his harassment and intimidation of many women in our movement. This will make Twitter safer from women-abusers like you.

    Thing is, given your snarky defence of libel, any squeals from you about “libel” will be completely ignored. TWO CAN PLAY THIS GAME, and we have just moved on to the next level.

    This message is not intended to published – its simply an update (and a big massive fuck you) for you to read.

    PS – Newsnight is now backtracking. When the apologies are published, we will happily publicise the fact that you applauded the libel that was made. That’s what happens after the disgusting comments you made yesterday and today.

  8. 8
    FloraPoste

    Hear that, Ophelia? The people who have been obsessively collecting and storifying your tweets are going to block your tweets instead so they won’t be able to read them! Bet you’re really scared.

  9. 9
    Ophelia Benson

    Hahaha I know, right?

  10. 10
    oolon

    Haha real libel from our friend to prove he knows what it means… The Slymepit claim I screencapped one of their members posting child porn on their forum and saying I had reported it to their ISP/Police. How very naughty of me as that clearly is the wrong thing to do O_o? Fortunately for them I was joking. But they spoke to the offender and gave him the option of re-joining their community! Ahh isn’t that sweet, they say it was child porn and they are happy for people who post it to be part of the Slymepit. Well done lads, glad to see you are as inept a bunch of haters as I remember. Nothing changes.

    Also I’m looking forward to your side releasing the response from the BBC…. Surely that “very important man” .. Err.. Stang-something… Got his response by now? Well in the interests of transparency I think you should release it, so we can all bask in the reflected glory of the BBC lawyers opinions of you lot and your bogus lawsuit.

  11. 11
    Rutee Katreya

    Being true is a defense against Libel. I doubt anyone’s worried about that XD

    Also, a TV News media source would be, yanno, Slander. Soooooo….

  12. 12
    oolon

    OMFG, I missed this…

    As a result, a bot is being established and Tweeter users guilty of abusing women (YOU, and other FTB peeps), supporting people who make threats of violence (that includes YOU and Stephanie Zvan), and other misdemeanours, are going to be put on that list whether they like it or not. Oolon will be added as well, given his harassment and intimidation of many women in our movement. This will make Twitter safer from women-abusers like you.

    Are you using my open sourced code? Its a licence that requires attribution you know … You may be hearing from the FSF if you don’t comply, they take open source licenses very seriously.

    Oh and add me, twice, see if I or any “#FTBullies” complain at being added then maybe you’ll realise what a bunch of whiny pathetic prats you all are. (No chance)

  13. 13
    AJ Milne

    (Lawls at #8 and #9…)

    But sshhhhh! Don’t let on! I was gonna guffaw, but then I got to thinking… Wait!

    Imagine. Forgetting it was just a hilariously transparent attempt at somehow aping moral equivalency, and how comically inconsistent it is, they somehow completely lose the plot and actually use the thing! And thus stop getting tweets, not only from Ophelia, but from the entire FTB crew…

    Strangely, cut off from the source of their unhealthy obsessions, those obsessions, slowly, silently, fall off..

    Entirely accidentally, they have begun to heal themselves. They go offline! Sometimes, for hours at a time! They reflect… they learn… They learn there is more to life than virtual stalking… They get out… They meet people who aren’t invested in the same vendetta… They realize, after only years, yea, they really were being incredibly toxic…

    In those same mere years, they also become actually interesting, productive, vibrant members of the online community, who, truly miraculously, also cease jejune shouting in allcaps and composing limply grandiose would-be-manifestos that sound oddly like the discards from monologues written for the supervillain in an unusually bad Saturday morning cartoon…

    No no. Don’t stop me. I can see the whole thing now… Sometime in 2019, we see two of ‘em giving a TED Talk: ‘I was an obsessive online antifeminist… And then I wrote this bot…’

    It could happen, I tell you.

  14. 14
    Ophelia Benson

    oolon has a post about all this.

    http://www.oolon.co.uk/?p=411

  15. 15
    Ophelia Benson

    “limply grandiose would-be-manifestos” – phrase-maker! :D

  16. 16
    AJ Milne

    …phrase-maker!

    ‘Kay. I admit it. I use a bot to make those.

  17. 17
    Stephanie Zvan

    Oh, no! I’m going to be put on a list!

    Like the “FtBullies” lists I’ve been put on.

    Like the “cunt” lists I’ve been put on.

    From the deja vu and boredom Update up there is inspiring, I conclude it’s Tuvok/Groc again. Hey, Tuvok. Has our blog network collapsed as everyone “caught on” and stopped reading us yet?

  18. 18
    Ophelia Benson

    I think so. Whoever it is tries often, and talks the same absurd nonsense – “we will bury you” yadda yadda.

  19. 19
    F [is for failure to emerge]

    Yo #7, I think you are the one with the actionable libel – in your comment. But I really enjoyed your skewed reality for a moment, along with the general cranky demeanor and writing style. Time Cube much?

  20. 20
    Flewellyn

    So, the Slymepit will get their revenge on you, and others who want them to stop harassing them…by blocking the people that they were harassing?

    For some reason, the phrase “Oh no, Br’er Fox! Please don’t throw me in that briar patch!” comes to mind.

  21. 21
    Anthony K

    Seriously, Flewellyn. Oh, no, whatever will we do?

    Remember the stink they raised when Atheism+ was started? How dare you leave us? We have to work together! You’re being divisive! There are already organisations for social justice! We’re all atheists! We need to be a team!

  22. 22
    mofa

    I am level two…an ‘abuser’ apparently. I am in a frenzy (and loving it)…can’t wait to join any class action that is going…action against Oool0n or the BBC, or both, I don’t care.

  23. 23
    Stacy

    Also I’m looking forward to your side releasing the response from the BBC…. Surely that “very important man” .. Err.. Stang-something… Got his response by now? Well in the interests of transparency I think you should release it, so we can all bask in the reflected glory of the BBC lawyers opinions of you lot and your bogus lawsuit

    Indeed. Surely the Very Important One will share the response to his serious concerns? I’m sure we all very much want to laugh be edified.

  24. 24
    Anthony K

    Make sure you towel yourself off before you sign anything, mofa. It’s just basic human courtesy.

  25. 25
    Stephanie Zvan

    mofa, Level 2 is assholes, anti-feminists, and attention-seekers. You do know that truth is always a defense, right?

  26. 26
    Routemaster

    I’m sure a lawyer would advise Mofa to refrain from posting at FreethoughBlogs, until the class action is resolved, to avoid prejudicing the case.

  27. 27
    leebrimmicombe-wood

    “Oh no, Br’er Fox! Please don’t throw me in that briar patch!”

    LoL. I’m sure Ophelia is quaking in her boots (or slingbacks or whatever the hell she wears).

  28. 28
    Jafafa Hots

    If only real life worked this way – we could create a list of religions that are annoyingly intrusive and they would retaliate by putting us on a list of people to never proselytize.

  29. 29
    Jafafa Hots

    telemarketers threatening to put me on their do-not-call list…

    this could be the start of something BIG.

  30. 30
    oolon

    Very honoured to have added “mofa” / Mark Senior, the asshole who puts women off joining in with the IRL atheist community, to the block bot.
    http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2013/06/15/news-from-down-under-the-true-skeptical-women-side-with-the-guys/#comment-112492

    Unfortunately there is no way to block his stink out of the real world, only Twitter. Best argument for signing up to #Level2 I’ve heard all day ;-) http://www.theblockbot.com/sign_up

  31. 31
    Sili

    As a result, a bot is being established and Tweeter users guilty of abusing women (YOU, and other FTB peeps), supporting people who make threats of violence (that includes YOU and Stephanie Zvan), and other misdemeanours, are going to be put on that list whether they like it or not. Oolon will be added as well, given his harassment and intimidation of many women in our movement. This will make Twitter safer from women-abusers like you.

    So … you’re creating a shared block list just like Oolon suggested Twitter do?

    I must say I’m impressed. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone agree so vehemently before.

  32. 32
    kevinsolway

    @Stephanie Zvan

    “Level 2 is assholes, anti-feminists, and attention-seekers.”

    That’s the same as saying “assholes, people who disagree with me, and attention seekers.”

    People who disagree with me = abusers.

    Label them as abusers on national television.

    Exactly what we’ve come to expect.

  33. 33
    Anthony K

    That’s the same as saying “assholes, people who disagree with me, and attention seekers.”

    It’s actually not, you fucking moron. Anti-feminists are a subset of the group of people who disagree with Ophelia Benson. The groups are clearly not the same, as anyone with a basic grasp of logic can see. Ask one of your little photoshoppy dipshit friends to draw you a Venn diagram, if words are too hard for you to understand.

    What the fuck is wrong with a person like you? How did you get to be so fucking stupid?

  34. 34
    Anthony K

    Anti-feminists are a subset of the group of people who disagree with Ophelia Benson.

    Or Stephanie Zvan.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite="" class=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>