Skip to main content

View Diary: 'Nay' on Proposed Stalking Rule (312 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You must engage in all ... (6+ / 0-)

    ...three proscribed behaviors stated in the rule, not just one of them, to be in violation.

    "White people are looking at you." - Wanda Sykes

    by Meteor Blades on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 12:58:41 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Practically, however, if you've engaged in (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kj in missouri, caul, mdmslle

      behavior violating the second part of Element 3 (from which intent can be inferred) you'll have already violated Element 1 -- and if you've violated Element 1 you have almost surely violated the second part of Element 3.  So really, you have a two part test: have you followed people into diaries enough to demonstrate malice, and do those comments invoke the five prohibited categories?

      I think that enforcing this will make you miserable, but that's your call.

      A mess of Bush Admin officials have gotten away with serious crimes! Grab a mop!

      by Seneca Doane on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 03:34:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Is the rule ready for prime time? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Stalking is defined as having 3 requirements:

      (1) On multiple occasions, one or more commenters follow a community member into diary threads; and,

      (2) The commenter(s) engage in the conduct of posting comments that consists of false information, personal attacks, lies, rumors, or implied/express disclosure of private information; and

      (3) The commenter(s) engages in this conduct with the intent to harass, harm, humiliate, frighten or intimidate another poster. This intent may be inferred from the number of times that the commenter follows a community member on the boards and/or the nature of the comments posted.

      This is my attempt to write this with structural breakdown so that the parts can more easily looked at separately.

      (1)  Following another member into more than one thread and posting:

      a)  false information

      b)  personal attacks

      c)  lies or rumors about that member

      d)  personal information or threats to disclose personal information

      As written points 1 and 2 seem to be parts of the same and multiple occasions is quite vague. Perhaps something like 3 or more diaries would be better.

      (2)  The intent of the conduct is to harass, harm, humiliate, frighten, or intimidate another member. Intent may be inferred...

      Intent and inferred? It's getting a bit vague and subjective. At this point I'm leaning 'Nay' but I will continue reading comments in both threads before voting (I'm an informed voter :-)

      Capital is only the fruit of labor, [...] Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
      President Lincoln, December 3, 1861

      by notrouble on Sun Oct 25, 2009 at 07:00:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site