TurboTaco
TD Admin
In regards to: http://gawker.com/5950981/unmasking-reddits-violentacrez-the-biggest-troll-on-the-web
Not sure if anyone has followed this story or known about this super-troll (I just found out after reading this) but I have heard of his subreddits, namely the creepshots one. He has recently been 'doxxed' (another term I was unaware about until this article) which means his personal information was pasted for the internet to see without his consent. He also has lost his job now too since the info was released.
My question again is, do you believe that free speech and internet anonymity gives a person the right to be a troll such as posting young teens/tweens in bikinis n what not, so long as it is not deemed illegal?
After reading this article, I feel like there are a couple interesting sides to this story and supporters and denouncers of this individual. I also think this story is important because it really is reflecting upon how internet culture is evolving in regards to 'free speech' forums/sites like 4chan and reddit. Recently Amanda Todd committed suicide due to an online stalker+troll who also has been 'doxxed' by Anonymous; while numerous people continue to post trollish comments on her tribute page.
The people who are 'for' ViolentAcres say what he did is not illegal; that in fact it is the 'victims' fault for allowing their facebook/myspace/blog to be public allowing anyone to stalk and steal then repost their images elsewhere. They also hold a sacred code in regards to free speech and anonymity which strictly prohibits another user from posting another persons personal information without explicit consent. In other words, what this gawker author did was a big no-no in internet ethos.
On the other hand many other users believe what this man received was just desserts considering he was quite candid mixing his real-life with his online persona to which he seemed to have no problems with. He would regularly meet other redditors IRL and organize these meets himself. While he never posted his RL information for others, people do not consider his public life to be so difficult to retrieve as it was for him to take pictures from unsuspecting profiles. Others would say the subreddits he had created were disgusting and vile, and that it should never have been allowed at all let blow-up into the popularity they had become.
I am torn on this issue. I personally believe free speech is one of the most amazing things the internet has brought to the world where the internet is not censored. On the other hand, what this guy was doing was on a thin-line, edging closer to something that people know is illegal (pedophelia, rape, racism + hate, etc.). At the same time, he never did anything illegal either. I would definitely argue his subreddits are dangerous avenues, especially for real sex offenders who do prey on minors as well as abusers who beat their wives and children.
No doubt in my mind, this guy was a total troll. He knew what he was doing the whole time and I personally think he is a creepy slimeball.
What I can't really agree with is how he was ousted and how he is now personally affected in real-life. I mean, what are the future implications for him and others like him as well as the state of the internet and how it may be regulated?
Trolls are bad, trolls like this guy are the worst, but I just don't think his life and family needs to be ruined because he was a trolling pervert.
Not sure if anyone has followed this story or known about this super-troll (I just found out after reading this) but I have heard of his subreddits, namely the creepshots one. He has recently been 'doxxed' (another term I was unaware about until this article) which means his personal information was pasted for the internet to see without his consent. He also has lost his job now too since the info was released.
My question again is, do you believe that free speech and internet anonymity gives a person the right to be a troll such as posting young teens/tweens in bikinis n what not, so long as it is not deemed illegal?
After reading this article, I feel like there are a couple interesting sides to this story and supporters and denouncers of this individual. I also think this story is important because it really is reflecting upon how internet culture is evolving in regards to 'free speech' forums/sites like 4chan and reddit. Recently Amanda Todd committed suicide due to an online stalker+troll who also has been 'doxxed' by Anonymous; while numerous people continue to post trollish comments on her tribute page.
The people who are 'for' ViolentAcres say what he did is not illegal; that in fact it is the 'victims' fault for allowing their facebook/myspace/blog to be public allowing anyone to stalk and steal then repost their images elsewhere. They also hold a sacred code in regards to free speech and anonymity which strictly prohibits another user from posting another persons personal information without explicit consent. In other words, what this gawker author did was a big no-no in internet ethos.
On the other hand many other users believe what this man received was just desserts considering he was quite candid mixing his real-life with his online persona to which he seemed to have no problems with. He would regularly meet other redditors IRL and organize these meets himself. While he never posted his RL information for others, people do not consider his public life to be so difficult to retrieve as it was for him to take pictures from unsuspecting profiles. Others would say the subreddits he had created were disgusting and vile, and that it should never have been allowed at all let blow-up into the popularity they had become.
I am torn on this issue. I personally believe free speech is one of the most amazing things the internet has brought to the world where the internet is not censored. On the other hand, what this guy was doing was on a thin-line, edging closer to something that people know is illegal (pedophelia, rape, racism + hate, etc.). At the same time, he never did anything illegal either. I would definitely argue his subreddits are dangerous avenues, especially for real sex offenders who do prey on minors as well as abusers who beat their wives and children.
No doubt in my mind, this guy was a total troll. He knew what he was doing the whole time and I personally think he is a creepy slimeball.
What I can't really agree with is how he was ousted and how he is now personally affected in real-life. I mean, what are the future implications for him and others like him as well as the state of the internet and how it may be regulated?
Trolls are bad, trolls like this guy are the worst, but I just don't think his life and family needs to be ruined because he was a trolling pervert.
