Joey Barton

[M18CTID]

That's a ridiculous comparison. Claiming that something which is illegal is "ok" isn't a matter of opinion. It's still illegal regardless of someone's opinion.

Nothing ridiculous about it with regards to the point I was making. Oh, and online hate is also illegal so that’s not ok either despite what the Free speech bellends try to claim.

 

[M18CTID]

That's not the point I'm making though is it? M18CTID is comparing Joey Barton posting on Twitter that he thinks Eni Aluko is a shit pundit with a paedophile encouraging more people to be sex offenders.

This isn't too far from comparing one of us stating that Kalvin Phillips had a poor game on the post match thread to Anjem Choudery directing terrorism. He didn't do anything, just gave his opinion.

And it’s been pointed out numerous times that Barton knew exactly what he was doing - that he knew that it would drum up support amongst all his knuckle-dragging followers. Why the fuck do you think he’s been investigated and charged for it?

 

[mattcity5]

That's not the point I'm making though is it? M18CTID is comparing Joey Barton posting on Twitter that he thinks Eni Aluko is a shit pundit with a paedophile encouraging more people to be sex offenders.

This isn't too far from comparing one of us stating that Kalvin Phillips had a poor game on the post match thread to Anjem Choudery directing terrorism. He didn't do anything, just gave his opinion.

No, I know it isn't what you were saying. @M18CTID made a bit of an exaggerated comparison to make his point though, and you just picked up on the exaggeration.

His point stands. People's lives can be made miserable because of harassment and abuse on social media, to the point sometimes, where the abused commits suicide. It is much more wide-ranging and inescapable for people, than somebody shouting abuse on the streets, and we wouldn't put up with that, but there are people in this thread suggesting it's okay to do it on social media because "freedom of speech".

There needs to be a new online law of "freedom to not suffer from cuntish behaviour".

 

[Cellarite]

Nothing ridiculous about it with regards to the point I was making. Oh, and online hate is also illegal so that’s not ok either despite what the Free speech bellends try to claim.

It really is a ridiculous comparison and if you can't see the difference between tweeting that a pundit is crap at their job and standing on a street corner encouraging paedophilia, I don't know what to say.

 

[Cellarite]

And it’s been pointed out numerous times that Barton knew exactly what he was doing - that he knew that it would drum up support amongst all his knuckle-dragging followers. Why the fuck do you think he’s been investigated and charged for it?

I guess any case will decide whether he crossed a line or not. I do believe he knew what he was doing but is the amount of followers he has on X the deciding factor here? Would I be ok to spout the same things about Eni Aluko because my two lads and their two mates are the only people that follow me?

I haven't once said that I support Barton in his actions, just that your comparison was ridiculous. You can get as aggressive as you like but that won't change.

 

[M18CTID]

It really is a ridiculous comparison and if you can't see the difference between tweeting that a pundit is crap at their job and standing on a street corner encouraging paedophilia, I don't know what to say.

He didn't just tweet that she was crap at her job though did he? If he did, then he wouldn't have been charged with "malicious communications". And anyone with half a fucking brain cell can see that there was malicious intent in his tweets.

And yes, on the face of it there was a big difference with the example I used but if online hate leads to someone committing suicide - as has happened in the past and is one of the reasons why we have such laws governing it these days - then that big difference doesn't become much of a difference at all.

 

[mattcity5]

I guess any case will decide whether he crossed a line or not. I do believe he knew what he was doing but is the amount of followers he has on X the deciding factor here? Would I be ok to spout the same things about Eni Aluko because my two lads and their two mates are the only people that follow me?

I haven't once said that I support Barton in his actions, just that your comparison was ridiculous. You can get as aggressive as you like but that won't change.

There is a difference between shouting on a street corner and doing it online with thousand/millions (?) of followers.

Obviously the personal one may be worse at the time, but when it's done it's done (unless somebody records it and posts it online!), however bad.

When somebody with a large following online does it, there may not be the initial hurt, but there is a continuous echo caused by everyone continuously retweeting/replying/forwarding that message. That can go on for months even.

I don't know what the answer is, should people not be arseholes? Yes. Should people have thicker skin? Sometimes, yes. But we're in a day and age where people are told to consider each other's mental health, and we don't know the state of mind of the person on the receiving end at any time.

 

[M18CTID]

I guess any case will decide whether he crossed a line or not. I do believe he knew what he was doing but is the amount of followers he has on X the deciding factor here? Would I be ok to spout the same things about Eni Aluko because my two lads and their two mates are the only people that follow me?

I haven't once said that I support Barton in his actions, just that your comparison was ridiculous. You can get as aggressive as you like but that won't change.

Technically, no you wouldn't but the chances are that you'd get away with it because you don't have the reach that Barton has for it to get brought to the attention of the authorities. Not that everyone with next to no followers tweeting offensive shite from their bedroom gets away with that kind of shit. This was 12 years ago by the way:

Tom Daley Twitter abuse: Boy given warning and bailed

A teenager arrested over a malicious tweet sent to Team GB diver Tom Daley is given a warning by police.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[thismeansfour]

If he actually just said she is shite at her job (which she is) nothing would have happened. He pushed it too far and why he is now being charged. Happy for Barton to be held accountable once more, not happy though that she may now get thrown in our faces even more because of this, despite the fact she can not do her job as a pundit properly. She isn't lone, there are many male, female, black, white pundits that are garbage too. Too much football being on TV has led us to needing bums on seats regardless of their credentials.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

Nothing ridiculous about it with regards to the point I was making. Oh, and online hate is also illegal so that’s not ok either despite what the Free speech bellends try to claim.

Free speech bellends?

Define “hate speech” and please be specific.

And, no-one is saying it’s OK to do anything illegal. Rather, a few people seem to be saying words shouldn’t be illegal. They can be disgusting, abhorrent, unseemly, etc., but illegal?

Again, who decides and why? Be careful what you wish for!