Former MLB Pitcher Doxes Internet Trolls, Delivers Real-World Consequences 467
An anonymous reader writes: When Twitter trolls began posting obscene, sexually explicit comments about his teenage daughter, former MLB pitcher Curt Schilling responded by recording their comments and gathering personal information readily available to the public. He then doxxed two of them on his blog, resulting in one being suspended from his community college and the other being fired from his part-time job as a ticket seller for the New York Yankees. There were seven others in Curt's crosshairs, all college athletes, but although he hasn't publicly doxxed those individuals, he hints, "I found it rather funny at how quickly tone changed when I heard via email from a few athletes who'd been suspended by their coaches. Gone was the tough guy tweeter, replaced by the 'I'm so sorry' apology used by those only sorry because they got caught."
Sad (Score:5, Informative)
There are far too many sociopaths in the world, and the Internet seems to be a perfect playground for their misanthropy.
Re:Idiotic (Score:5, Insightful)
Sociopaths and Misanthropes are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
The foundation of their illness, the description - basically - no, not basically. At every definition, these are completely different.
LEARN 2 WORD.
I won't beleaguer the point, but you need to be slapped on the ass with a dictionary.
There are too many sociopaths. The internet seems to be a perfect playground where ignorant people can pretend to be informed, and hurt other people in the process.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Since you refuse to clarify, and I, being relatively ignorant, must rely on the dictionary definitions, I don't understand the point you are trying to make:
sociopath: a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience.
misanthrope: a person who dislikes humankind and avoids human society.
From those definitions, it appears that it is possible to be a misanthrope and not be sociopathic, but that one of the defining characteristics of being a sociopath is some level of misanthropy (or, at least, misanthropic behaviour). Of course, rather than berating the original poster, perhaps you could attempt to bring clarity. On the other hand, perh
Re: (Score:3)
Why can't a sociopath embrace human society and like people? That doesn't stop them doing nasty things.
I like my small furry creatures in Lemmings. I teach them how to help themselves. They're lovely and cute and so sweet when I tell them to commit suicide, and go, "Oh no!" just before making like fundamentalist muslim.
Re:Idiotic (Score:5, Interesting)
This is itself a fairly sociopathic post. If someone is ignorant, educate them. If they refuse to be educated, others will still learn from what you're saying. The clowns in this story weren't ignorant, they were just assholes.
Re: (Score:2)
Since we all got mothers, I'd argue misogyny IS misanthropic.
Re: (Score:3)
Doesn't that make you the insensitive clod?
Uh ...wat? (Score:2)
Doxing isn't using public information. It's using private information. Otherwise a phone book would be doxing, so would house addresses.
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:5, Insightful)
But that's just like, uh, my opinion man. So feel free to disagree.
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's using information to garner a public lynching response
which, in this particular case, was the best thing he could have done.
His only three alternatives were, in order of saneability:
- do nothing;
- go to a local police station and see the complaint archived in a desk;
- do what I probably have done and get a shotgun out to protect his little girl from threats of sexual assault and worse;
This guy is the best dad this girl could have right now.
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:4, Insightful)
No it is NOT the best thing he could do. He is completely reliant on the information he gathered being factual and correct, which he has no way to verify. If someone had decided to leave a trail to an innocent person he could well be up for some serious legal trouble not to mention the pain he inflicted on them. vigilante responses are dangerous. His targets may have been correct this time, but I will almost bet everything I have that someone will now try and take advantage of what he has done to screw over someone innocent next time.
Re: (Score:2)
not to mention the pain he inflicted on them.
Won't somebody PLEASE think of the child molesters!
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:4, Insightful)
Agree 100%. Cheer-leading for SJWs makes me sick. But, it makes sense. Many people have trouble seeing consequences past the next 30 seconds. Pretty scary, isn't it?
Is this ever expanding definition of "SJW" now including protective fathers pissed off that creeps are harassing their daughters?
Well I guess I'm an SJW then, because anyone hurts my little girl and I'll put a bullet in their head.
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:5, Insightful)
SJW seems to be code words for people who don't like trolls. The definition is just so vague. Anyone trying to upset the sexist status quo, or even hinting that someone somewhere might be sexist, is an SJW. It's like a knee jerk reaction to political correctness, except that this has nothing to do with political correctness except in the mind of trolls.
Re: (Score:3)
SJW used to be a great term. It was descriptive and just denigrating enough to show how SJW actions were far more offensive than the imagined-or-not offense of their target.
Then Gamergate happened and "SJW" got hijacked to the point where it's useless as a term, and says as much about the people using it as it does the people it's being applied to.
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:5, Funny)
His only three alternatives were, in order of saneability: ...
Given we're talking about Curt Schilling, he had a fourth option readily available - he could've slapped them silly using a bloody sock.
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:5, Insightful)
But while I have little sympathy for these dickheads, and I completely understand his motivation, I don't like this eye-for-an-eye response.
Easy to say when it isn't your daughter receiving death/rape threats. I don't know of a single parent who wouldn't do this (and more) if their children are threatened.
There is no proportionality when something like this goes viral.
Then the assholes shouldn't have said anything in the first place. We're not talking about a couple of screwed up kids thinking that they're funny. The people doing this were adults. There is no fucking excuse for this.
Should these guys have their lives ruined over this?
Actions have consequences. I don't know why people can't get this through their heads. The same freedom that allows you to post rape treats is the same freedom someone can use to hunt you down and expose you.
If someone came onto your lawn and started yelling about how they were going to rape your daughter, they're not going to get a little slap on the wrist. They'd get arrested, thrown in jail, and possibly be put on a sex offender list.
IF YOU WOULDN'T DO IT IN REAL LIFE, THEN DON'T FUCKING DO IT ON THE INTERNET.
Should they be subjected to the same bullying magnified through the lens of a million internet users out for "justice"? I think not.
Tough. Shit. They should have thought about that before publicly posting rape threats.
If one of these idiots kills himself over the response Curt will have effectively sentenced him to death. We shouldn't be comfortable with that outcome as a society.
No, he wouldn't. He's not responsible for what people do with the information. He's letting people know that there as some twisted fucks in their midst. That's a public service. I'm pretty sure most parents don't want to be associated with (or have their kids associated with) someone who thinks it's funny to make brutal rape threats.
Actions have consequences. If you can't handle the consequences or potential consequences of your actions, THEN DON'T FUCKING DO THEM. The fact that these assholes/idiots didn't stop to think about all the ways this could come back and bite them on the ass is no excuse. We may be a society laws, but we are also a society of humans.
Re: (Score:3)
If you were into the whole "reading comprehension" thing, you might have understood a list of three alternatives to the action he took.
Or you might have gone ahead and done the clueless Anonymous Coward thing anyhow, as some sort of Kaufman-esque meta-performance-art schtick.
Re: (Score:2)
The guy's a blogger. What's his motivation? What's his incentive?
I think he met those marks.
I agree with what he did.
What he did agrees with him.
Re:Sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
How could you dox Curt Schilling? He's got better name recognition then most of the politicians in DC. Maybe you could release home address, but if you're a dad and the options are a) read tweets discussing the rape of your daughter, and b) deal with a bunch of dorks trying to vandalize your house you better not pick a.
The same principle applies to drawing trolls to himself. He's a grown man who has put up with Yankees fans and enraged Rhode island taxpayers. He can handle abuse. She's a teenager who happens to have a famous father and enough softball talent to play at the college level. She can probably handle it, but why should she have to?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, I am uncomfortable with the use of "doxing" to mean de-anonymizing a libeler, when there are innocent victims of doxing [salon.com].
Get used to it, cause doxing refers to what's done, not the motivation. For example, "murder" is someone kills someone else, be it by accident, pre-mediated, etc.
In addition, whe he did falls entirely within the current definition of doxing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing). IE:
Doxing is the Internet-based practice of researching and broadcasting personally identifiable information about an individual. The methods employed to acquire this information include searching publicly available databases and social media websites (like Facebook), hacking, and social engineering.
The very first method is searching publicly available information!
"Innocent victims of doxing"... is that supposed to be like "but think of the children!" Doxing is what it is. Whether the result is good or bad is subjective and
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:5, Informative)
For example, "murder" is someone kills someone else, be it by accident, pre-mediated, etc.
Incorrect, and also a terrible example for the point you're trying to make. Murder is the malicious, unlawful killing of someone. It is certainly *not* appropriate to use "murder" to describe an accident. Manslaughter is killing someone with mitigating legal circumstances. Accidentally kiling someone is usually called involuntary manslaughter.
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:5, Informative)
You are correct. I used the wrong word. I believe a more appropriate word would have been "Homicide", which is simply to cause the death of another human being, whereas "murder" and "manslaughter" are types of homicide.
My point stands though, so thanks for correcting me, and a big FU to the AC's yelling STFU and contributing nothing of value to the topic.
Re: (Score:2)
For example, "murder" is someone kills someone else, be it by accident, pre-mediated, etc.
Incorrect, and also a terrible example for the point you're trying to make. Murder is the malicious, unlawful killing of someone. It is certainly *not* appropriate to use "murder" to describe an accident. Manslaughter is killing someone with mitigating legal circumstances. Accidentally kiling someone is usually called involuntary manslaughter.
He probably meant homicide. If one person kills another person it's always homicide, regardless of accidents/self-defense/etc.
Re: Uh ...wat? (Score:2)
Damn that Bush/Obama newspeak "manslaughter."
They even traveled back in time and got Ben Jonson off light with his conviction of it in 1598.
ROFL
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's a story about Curt Schilling calling out the guys who are talking about fisting and raping his underage daughter, and you're "uncomfortable" with how people use the word "doxing." Way to keep things in perspective.
Here, here's a definition for you:
search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the Internet, typically with malicious intent
Re: (Score:2)
To answer your question, yes, we are worried about someone making stupid sick offensive comments on twitter, comments that only show the rest of the world how weak and immature they really are.
Thanks for playing.
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:5, Funny)
There's a reason why no culture on Earth uses the idiom "as smart as a troll."
Likewise "as pretty as an airport." -Douglas Adams.
Re: (Score:2)
Better question is how dumb does a troll have to be to actually be linked to their real-life identity without someone actually cracking their account security?
If you looked at what these guys posted, you know that they are absolutely in the bottom 5 percent of the IQ department. So I'm not surprised at all.
Most of the internet is like that now (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember we used to tell kids not to give out their real name on the net? Then Facebook happened and what used to appear to be dumb is now the default.
It would be truly ironic for you to post what you've written above if your name really is Matthew Ventura.
Even more so if I was really the software dbaseIII that had become self aware over the years instead of someone taking the common form of it's name as a handle.
Re: (Score:2)
"gets more awesome the more news I hear about him"
You mean like screaming about evolution being not true?
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/1... [usatoday.com]
Or giving Rhode Island taxpayers the shaft when his completely failed as a businessman, and left them holding the bag?
http://updates.deadspin.com/po... [deadspin.com]
I'm just really curious about your definition of awesome?
Re:Uh ...wat? (Score:4, Insightful)
Awesome is doxxing trolls?
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not the height of ignorance.
The height of ignorance is when you buy a Blizzard® at Dairy Queen instead of enjoying the nectar called, "root beer."
Taken (Score:2)
Seems like he's cool (Score:5, Informative)
The guys who were just messing around with stuff like "Can't wait to date her!" he responded in kind, and the people who were total shits he took the gloves off with.
Re:Seems like he's cool (Score:4, Informative)
Should be more common (Score:5, Insightful)
At any rate, screw the scumbags, they deserve their comeuppance.
Don't poke the internet (Score:2)
This guy just made himself the target of trolls everywhere. Boasting about this will prove to have been a very poor choice.
Re: (Score:2)
This guy just made himself the target of trolls everywhere. Boasting about this will prove to have been a very poor choice.
I doubt it. These guys look like lamers even to other trolls.
Re:Don't poke the internet (Score:4, Insightful)
trolls are common pathetic cowards. they're middle school bullies in adult bodies if they aren't in fact actual middle school bullies. any effective defense against their lame efforts immediately chases them away like shining a light on a bunch of cockroaches
you're talking about another kind of douchebag: the stalker
but what gets the kind of person who becomes a celebrity stalker excited isn't avenging trolls
if curt schilling or his daughter attract an actual griefing stalker, it won't be because of this episode
and even then, the proper defense is the response he's already engaged in: a good offense. shut the shitbag down, hard, immediately. schilling sounds like he has his act together. his daughter will be protected and taken care of from the slime out there
The thing about witch hunts... (Score:5, Insightful)
is that sooner or later we're all witches.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
we're talking about targeted low grade comeuppance for bad behavior, directed at the actual douchebags who committed the bad behavior
we're not talking about targeting waves of completely innocent teenage girls for hysterical spasms of imagined delusional fantastic crimes, and then murdering them brutally
so no, sorry, your analogy sucks and you don't know what you're talking about
Re: (Score:3)
How about this:
The thing about witch hunts is that sooner or later we're all witches to someone with an agenda.
And everyone has an agenda.
Pandora's Box (Score:5, Insightful)
The irresponsibility with which the modern media operates astounds me. The cheerleading tone of this article is unmissable. We are supposed to rise from our seats and applaud this sportsmensch who hunted down the skeeves speaking ill of his daughter. And hey, on one level, I do.
But here's a little perspective that NJ.com apparently can't be counted on to supply. Just because this case is pretty black and white doesn't mean they all will be. The next time, some jackass will create social networking profiles with breadcrumbs leading back to their real target, and with minimal effort will get a Curt Schilling to do the dirty work, and bear the legal liability, for them.
This is why we have police departments. I fully recognize that they've deteriorated in capability and trustworthiness, losing their role as guardians of the real public interest to politics and less esoteric concerns like meeting budgets and justifying headcounts, but that's a reason to fix what's broken about our system, not replace it with every-man-for-himself vigilantism.
Re:Pandora's Box (Score:5, Interesting)
This is why we have police departments.
And what happens when the police departments show complete disinterest to your problem?
Seriously in some regards screw em. I've been robbed and then told by the police that they won't investigate because I'm covered by insurance anyway. Then I see them standing by the road side spending all their time making sure people don't drive more than 1km/h over the speed limit.
Police departments are great when they work, but often they don't. If someone tries to stab me and I get away, I'd go to the police. If someone hurts my feelings online I'll try to get revenge online.
Re: (Score:2)
And what happens when the police departments show complete disinterest to your problem?
Change the system. Sorry there isn't an easier answer, but that's the price of living in a democracy.
If someone hurts my feelings online I'll try to get revenge online.
I've just shown you the cliff at the end of the road you're traveling. If you choose to proceed despite this, there isn't much more that I can say. Via con Dios.
Re: (Score:2)
The next time, some jackass will create social networking profiles with breadcrumbs leading back to their real target, and with minimal effort will get a Curt Schilling to do the dirty work, and bear the legal liability, for them.
Yep. Everyone loves a good false flag operation. To be honest I'm kind of surprised that it hasn't happened more already.
Re:Pandora's Box (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Which witch?
The Metaphor (Score:5, Insightful)
The Salem Witch Trials were good thing. After all, there might have been some real witches there.
In this case you have people literally flying around on metaphorical brooms on Twitter.
If there had been actual witches eating children, are you saying they should have done nothing? Because that's what you are saying should be done in the case of people talking on Twitter about how they want to rape his daughter.
We aren't talking about witch-hunts here against people who have done nothing. We are talking about bringing consequences to people who in fact HAVE done something and expect nothing to happen as a result.
Re:The Metaphor (Score:5, Insightful)
In this one case. However, the methodology is still extremely dangerous to use. The Salem witch trial methods would still have killed many innocents even if witches did exist. And that's what is going to happen here.
Someone moderately clever will post horrifically offensive content under someone else's name, then "catch" the designated offender and post their info and purported crimes to social media.
How? Reaction is equal and opposite. (Score:2, Insightful)
The Salem witch trial methods would still have killed many innocents even if witches did exist
But all that we are seeing in THIS case is someone pointing out what people are saying to others. So the harm done is directly proportional ONLY to the persons own actions.
Someone moderately clever will post horrifically offensive content under someone else's name, then "catch" the designated offender and post their info and purported crimes to social media.
So since that might happen one in 500 million times of AC
Re:How? Reaction is equal and opposite. (Score:4, Insightful)
We should combat crime using methods that do not lend themselves so readily to abuse. A legal system exists for the purpose of punishing crime. Mob vigilantism has proven throughout history to be dangerously unjust.
Don't get caught up in your superhero fantasies and think that they can be applied to the real world.
Re: (Score:3)
What's wrong with a case by case application of common sense? I'd say Curt was pretty mild actually. If these shitbags had picked on the wrong guy they might have actually gotten hurt for real and maybe permanent.
Re:Virtual Self Defense (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on, you realistically expect the police to handle every case like this?
Police departments that currently exist? Not in every case we'd be talking about, no. We evidently need something new, but that something new is more like a police department than mob justice.
This is no different from having a reasonable right to self defense to protect your life.
The claim that mob internet justice is "no different" than individual right to self-defense is so utterly ridiculous that it borders on not worth responding to. Here is a rather meaningful difference: when you're going to shoot someone, you can see them and know what you're aiming at. I guess you didn't think of that.
If you are being harassed online you should be able to do something about it
I completely concur. That's the point of what I'm saying. You totally should be able to do something about it, and that something should not require you to become a private investigator, politician, lawyer, judge, and security guard. Nor should it only be available to those with enough resources: time, money, knowledge, physical or intellectual capabilities, etcetera.
The earlier you take action, the more you cut off the really bad stuff.
This behavior pattern - acting before thinking it through - leads to what's called "flailing". Experts will tell you pretty universally that this is one of the worst things to do if you're being stalked and harassed on the internet.
What if what is broken is having inherent trust in the system to do everything for you?
Then you've engaged in a strawman. Nothing about what I've just said demands "having inherent trust in the system to do everything for you".
Re: (Score:2)
I'll rest my case here, I think...
Re:Virtual Self Defense (Score:4, Informative)
I was a victim of identity theft a few years ago. Someone obtained my personal information and opened a card in my name. (It happened to land on my doorstep because the idiots paid for rush delivery BEFORE changing the address.) When I reported it to the police, they admitted that they weren't likely to put much effort into the case because they'd likely have to do a lot of work to track down the perpetrator only to hand the case off to another precinct. They also demonstrated some basic lack of understanding of all things Internet. (They got the online credit card order form with the IP address and date but called it a dead end. I showed them how to tracert the IP to find out the ISP and then told them the could get the ISP to give them the person signed into the account at that time. Not that they did the latter, mind you.)
In short, the police might not have the skills or the motivation to look into an online threat of rape by some Internet trolls. It's not like Curt Shilling got their home address, surprised them outside their houses, and beat them to a pulp. He just said who they really are. Everything that happened afterwards (losing jobs and spots on teams) was a result of their own actions catching up with them.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the system itself is broken.
What percentage broken constitutes "broken"? If you're talking about policing, I'm assuming you don't see any major problems with, say, badges. So you don't want to change 100% of the system, then.
So now we're onto a saner argument: what specifically is broken, and how should we approach fixing it?
Re: (Score:3)
because someone might get framed for murder, we can't go after real murderers
That's not my argument at all. I'm saying that we should have professionals to do things like that.
Re: (Score:2)
you can't get what you ask for
low grade twitter harassment is not going to be dealt with by the police
not all justice rises to the level of police and court involvement. it's not "vigilantism" if the stakes and consequences are low
you have standards which are unrealistic and will never be met, therefore you should read my words again and understand what schilling did is 100% appropriate and responsible
I read some of the comments to her (Score:5, Insightful)
The comments were horrific. Directed at her, because she was his daughter. Her only "crime" was being the daughter of a sports star. She had done nothing, but comments ranged from raping her, to penetrating her with a baseball bat.
I hope every one of these sick little fuckers loses their job, gets kicked out of school *and* has their name attached to the story. I want somebody to find these comments *every* time that one of these guys is googled, forever.
This shit won't stop until there are actual consequences. It won't ever stop completely, but it could certainly help.
Re: (Score:2)
I hope every one of these sick little fuckers loses their job, gets kicked out of school *and* has their name attached to the story.
And then what? Go on welfare? Be homeless? Beg on the street? Never get an education or an opportunity to better himself? Life in jail? Never be able to get a job again? What's your plan that doesn't somebody else (likely us taxpayers) having to support them for the rest of their lives? Are you comfortable with angry people walking around with no money, nothing to do, and completely desperate?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I hope every one of these sick little fuckers loses their job, gets kicked out of school *and* has their name attached to the story.
And then what? Go on welfare? Be homeless? Beg on the street? Never get an education or an opportunity to better himself? Life in jail? Never be able to get a job again?
What's your plan that doesn't somebody else (likely us taxpayers) having to support them for the rest of their lives? Are you comfortable with angry people walking around with no money, nothing to do, and completely desperate?
Patting them on the head and tell them it's ok there won't be any repercussions ain't the damn answer either.
Re: (Score:3)
The general idea is that people will hear the story, learn from it, and then not take the risk that the same will happen to them.
It may not be the best strategy, but historically it has had some degree of success.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What's your plan that doesn't somebody else (likely us taxpayers) having to support them for the rest of their lives? Are you comfortable with angry people walking around with no money, nothing to do, and completely desperate?
Perhaps that's something they should've thought about before they applied for that cushy Object Lesson opening.
How much vile and inexcusable behavior are you ready to tolerate "so taxpayers don't have to support them"?
Re:I read some of the comments to her (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sure these kids will be fine in the long term. They will likely suffer for awhile until they get themselves back on their feet - perhaps at a different job or school. However, they will hopefully learn that actions (including stuff you post online) have consequences and there are actual people on the other side of that screen. Hopefully, other people who would otherwise have engaged in the same actions will learn from this as well and not post horrific "I'm going to rape you" threats (which is their horrid way of saying "you've said something online that I don't like but I'm horrible at debating my position without resorting to graphic threats of violence").
Maybe if more trolls found themselves victims of the consequences of their own actions, the Internet would be a nicer place.
Re: (Score:2)
"Now, I hope you, sick little fucker, loses your job, gets kicked out of schools *and* have your name attached to all the crude shit you've ever said. I want you to think about all the stupid shit you said when you were a kid, back before the Internet existed, *every* time you say stupid shit like this."
Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
Who? (Score:4, Informative)
This is about accountability (Score:5, Insightful)
The police only investigate serious crimes or imminent threats where either a lot of money or someone's life is on the line, and even then, they aren't fast, accurate, or trustworthy. The legal system does not have the time or the motivation or the resources to deal with what is the online equivalent of schoolyard antics.
That is not to say what these idiots were doing was trivial or harmless. But let's put it this way: suppose every time you had someone come up to you and say something completely disgusting and violent to your face, that your response was to do absolutely NOTHING except file a police report, do you really think that would stop such behavior? If someone punched you, are you just going to stand there and not defend yourself, instead electing to wait until you can go to the nearest station and file a report?
The bottom line is that you cannot reasonably expect to have a free internet while at the same time tell the government or law enforcement that users must be held accountable for their online actions. People suggesting that victims simply shrug off such behavior are either themselves psychopaths or have never themselves been the target of such abuse. And to then call out the victim for vigilantism is the height of delusion. Oh, but what if this opens up a slippery slope of unchecked vigilantism and real-world consequences for people who are the mistaken subject of retaliation?
Um,... I have some news for you: it's already lawless out there. It has always been. You can't simultaneously tell people to shrug off the trolls because "oh well that's the internet for you," yet cry foul when people fight back, saying "but what if innocent people lose their jobs?" That's hypocrisy. People are already suffering real-world consequences of the behaviors of trolls. You are just selectively inured to it because it happens a LOT more often and it's been going on for a lot longer than people successfully fighting back...and when they do fight back, it goes viral and makes the news because so many people are so desperate for a solution that it feels good to see the good guy winning for once.
That should tell you how completely nonexistent civility is in the online realm. People SHOULD be accountable for their actions online. But don't fucking tell me that it's the job of the government to do that for me, because we all know how PERFECTLY that works. What a joke. Accountability is not actually kicking someone in the balls for being a jackass. It's being able to carry out the promise of that consequence.
I read all the comments ... (Score:2)
... so far, and find that this article is way more interesting and relevant than "the dress."
tyvm
Make the internet grow up (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
We should hire Curt to rid Slashdot of the GNAA, MyCleanPC, etc trolls.
Curt "Haha RI Taxpayers" Schilling
Have Dox, Will Travel
Re:And the escalation continues (Score:5, Insightful)
So shitposters are allowed to be as vile as is possible to be, and nobody is allowed to do anything to fight back or we're "stooping to their level."
How very convenient... for the shitposters.
Let me guess, you still believe the "don't feed the trolls" line? And I guess you also fell for "if you ignore them they'll stop teasing you" too? Most kids eventually discover that the only way to actually make that stop is to, completely out of the blue and unexpectedly, knock the teaser's front teeth out... and that's basically what Schilling did.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Knocking their teeth out only works if you aren't outnumbered. Better take a gun to school...
Re:And the escalation continues (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't advocate violence as a first option. First, tell people in charge or people who can support you (friends, family, teachers, etc). Most times, this can help you deal with the bullies/trolls without resorting to violence. However, if those people who should be there to help you don't/won't, then violence can be considered. Even then, though, you can find yourself overpowered and/or outnumbered in which case you'll be beaten up AND bullied.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most kids eventually discover that the only way to actually make that stop is to, completely out of the blue and unexpectedly, knock the teaser's front teeth out... and that's basically what Schilling did.
To be fair, it really depends on the specific teaser and their motivations. The ones who do a half-assed job of it and are easily bored will usually move on if you ignore them. The ones who are more tenacious probably do need a kick in the teeth to get the message. Then there are the ones who are both tenacious and actively malicious, those are the ones that it's not a good idea to escalate with unless you're really prepared to follow through as far as it takes.
Re:And the escalation continues (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, 'cause it's so much better to let the trolls troll.
"The wiser head gives in" only means that the assholes get their way. Nothing else.
Re: (Score:3)
The next generation of "trolls" will only be more careful. Hope he feels proud of himself for stooping to their level.
Unfortunately (for the Internet trolls) being "more careful" isn't necessarily an option. What Curt Schilling actually demonstrated is that it's trivially easy to "out" or "dox" most people due to their blindly spewing every last bit of personal information about themselves all over the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
My personal rule is that I never say anything online if I wouldn't say it to a room filled with my wife, my boss, my family, and my friends. (Maybe my kids too, but they're young so there are some things that wouldn't be appropriate for them to hear just yet.) Granted, I would never think of threatening to rape someone's daughter - even as some kind of sick "joke" - no matter how anonymous I thought I was at the time. I guess trolling is just not in my nature. (Something for which I'll spend exactly zer
Re:And the escalation continues (Score:5, Insightful)
The trolls threatened to rape his daughter.
He exposed their identity leading them to be kicked off their teams due to their actions.
I fail to see how he "stooped to their level." Did he threaten them with violence? Did he pledge to jam a baseball bat up their rear? Did he post their address and claim he was going there to beat them to a bloody pulp? No. He just mentioned who they were. That was it.
I'm sick of this "posting graphic statements saying you're going to rape someone and then claiming 'just joking' when you're called on it." I'm sick of people even trying to claim freedom of speech. We have freedom of speech, but not freedom of consequence. If you threaten someone with violence (and, yes, raping someone *IS* violence), don't expect to use "freedom of speech" as a Get Out Of Jail Free card.
Part of this is personal for me. Growing up, I was bullied by a group of kids. I'm male, so the bullying didn't involve rape threats, but it did involve following me around and taunting me. Every. Single. School Day. Multiple times a day. Doors to my classroom would be blocked so I'd have to push past them enduring more taunts. I began to become paranoid that anyone who was laughing was laughing at me. One push one way or another and I could have been another story of a teen taking his own life or going out in a blaze of bullets. Luckily, a friend of mine spoke with my bullies who backed off. Turns out they just thought they were "having a little fun".
And this is what galls me the most. The trolls' friends telling Curt that this was all just kids "having fun." Because, apparently, some kids are so psychopathic that they can't even begin to fathom what their "fun" does to people until it is either made blindingly obvious to them or until they suffer personal consequences.
As a father and as a victim of bullying, I applaud Curt for what he did. He didn't get violent. He didn't rant and rave. He just stood firm, acted like a protective father, and took down some nasty Internet trolls.
Re:Doxing is asking for trouble. (Score:5, Funny)
Doxing someone is _never_ the wise answer.
Posted by Anonymous Coward is truly fitting.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand this "AC" hatred here in ./
We hate ACs because AC is mostly used for trolling.
All you need to get a slashdot account is a throwaway email address.
If you have an account, then you become accountable: we can tell whether what you say today matches what you said yesterday. Absent that, we have every reason to believe that you are just some malicious asshole.
I know... I know... this is ./, you cannot expect people to think twice before posting
...and it's lucky I didn't expect it from you, or I might be upset now.
Re: (Score:2)
Hah! Good one.
Re: (Score:2)
(AC, you're doing it wrong)
Re: (Score:2)
By the way, is this you?
No, and get a load of that poor fucker's middle name. If my parents gave me a name like that, I'd set shit on fire, too.
No, more like that.
Re: (Score:3)
I look down on anonymous trolls.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
A truly intelligent person ignores the taunts of idiots on the internet
Not always. Sometimes the best thing is TO confront someone. My first year of high school I was bullied. Right up until the day I laid him flat with a bloody nose. After that there were 0 taunts. He thought I was easy pickings coming 'from a christian school'. That just means we hide what we do from the teacher better than you.
The internet is forever. It is good to end it sooner than before you get to 'comfortable' behind your key
Re: (Score:2)
Revealing a trolls identity isn't asking for trouble.
It implicates them as a suspect for anything bad that may happen to you in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Revealing a trolls identity isn't asking for trouble. It implicates them as a suspect for anything bad that may happen to you in the future.
...but makes it more likely that something bad will happen to you. While you lay dying or nurse a permanent disability you can comfort yourself that you were able to give the police a list of your enemies.
Re: (Score:3)
There are far too many trolls who ill deserve the title. If you can be doxxed you're doing it very wrong. You have to create a whole new identity, use proxies located in non-friendly nations or TOR and never ever let your two identities share a single solitary detail.
Anyone smart enough to do that is smart enough to find better ways to employ their time than harrassing random strangers.
Re: (Score:2)
So "alpha male" rates a "Civility really is just a facade". What rating do you give the trolls in this instance?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It was pretty self-explanatory to me the first time I came across the word (years ago). I could see that the Xs were to enforce pronunciation, but it relates to docs (as in documenation). And I think it was clear that they are verbing a noun (fairly common).