Shaming online abusers

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by tom p » Tue Mar 03, 2020 4:12 pm

snoozeofreason wrote:
Mon Mar 02, 2020 3:12 pm
Fair enough. I wasn't really attempting to rehash old arguments.
Then you expressed yourself unbelievably poorly

User avatar
Stephanie
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2896
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:38 pm
Location: clinging tenaciously to your buttocks

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Stephanie » Tue Mar 03, 2020 7:30 pm

Fishnut wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 1:38 pm
Does anyone have any information on the effectiveness of shaming people like this? I've had a very quick look in Google Scholar but I couldn't find anything particularly relevant.
I read this last year https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/11/13/th ... -offender/
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."

User avatar
Fishnut
After Pie
Posts: 2447
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:15 pm
Location: UK

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Fishnut » Tue Mar 03, 2020 8:37 pm

Stephanie wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 7:30 pm
Fishnut wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 1:38 pm
Does anyone have any information on the effectiveness of shaming people like this? I've had a very quick look in Google Scholar but I couldn't find anything particularly relevant.
I read this last year https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/11/13/th ... -offender/
That's interesting, thanks :) . I'm curious about the Bristol Post's approach because so much shaming, certainly the type in your link, seems to involve directly shaming the person by commenting on their posts. Whereas the Post has printed screenshots of several different people. The screenshots mean that people have to go and seek them out to reply directly, and looking at several people rather than targetting one individual may diffuse any ire they get in response, and also make it clearer to readers that this is about a pattern of behaviour rather than one person overstepping what is considered acceptable.
it's okay to say "I don't know"

Bewildered
Fuzzable
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Bewildered » Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:10 am

tom p wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 4:12 pm
snoozeofreason wrote:
Mon Mar 02, 2020 3:12 pm
Fair enough. I wasn't really attempting to rehash old arguments.
Then you expressed yourself unbelievably poorly
I disagree, it was very clear his point was like “let he who is without sin cast the first stone” as he pointed out in the bit you cut out. I think snooze expressed himself pretty well and has responded very well to you and others making weird assumptions about what he wrote.

User avatar
JQH
After Pie
Posts: 2141
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:30 pm
Location: Sar Flandan

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by JQH » Wed Mar 04, 2020 12:21 pm

FWIW, my recollection of "dead in a ditch" is that Johnson said he'd rather be dead in a ditch than apply for another extension and several (including me) said we find his terms acceptable.
And remember that if you botch the exit, the carnival of reaction may be coming to a town near you.

Fintan O'Toole

Bewildered
Fuzzable
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Bewildered » Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:01 pm

Stephanie wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 7:30 pm
Fishnut wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 1:38 pm
Does anyone have any information on the effectiveness of shaming people like this? I've had a very quick look in Google Scholar but I couldn't find anything particularly relevant.
I read this last year https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/11/13/th ... -offender/
Nice thanks! Not that I should be judging the validly of science studies in this way, but I can definitely relate to the combination of increased sympathy and feeling that you should speak out more.

User avatar
snoozeofreason
Snowbonk
Posts: 485
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:22 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by snoozeofreason » Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:39 pm

JQH wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 12:21 pm
FWIW, my recollection of "dead in a ditch" is that Johnson said he'd rather be dead in a ditch than apply for another extension and several (including me) said we find his terms acceptable.
And FWIW I am, as I have already said, a bit puzzled as to why we have started using comments about Johnson as a point of reference. If you were going to wish someone's death then he is probably as close to fair game as you might get (if you think anyone is fair game). But he is not the only person whose death has been wished on the internet by people of a similar political orientation to us (nor the only person for whom a ditch has been suggested as a final resting place).
In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them. The human body was knocked up pretty late on the Friday afternoon, with a deadline looming. How well do you expect it to work?

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Woodchopper » Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:42 pm

snoozeofreason wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:39 pm
JQH wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 12:21 pm
FWIW, my recollection of "dead in a ditch" is that Johnson said he'd rather be dead in a ditch than apply for another extension and several (including me) said we find his terms acceptable.
And FWIW I am, as I have already said, a bit puzzled as to why we have started using comments about Johnson as a point of reference. If you were going to wish someone's death then he is probably as close to fair game as you might get (if you think anyone is fair game). But he is not the only person whose death has been wished on the internet, nor the only person for whom a ditch has been suggested as a final resting place.
It may be because Johnson dead in a ditch is used as an example of acceptable speech in the forum rules: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=41

Though of course you all know that as you look at the rules every morning.

User avatar
snoozeofreason
Snowbonk
Posts: 485
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:22 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by snoozeofreason » Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:58 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:42 pm
Though of course you all know that as you look at the rules every morning.
I genuinely was looking at the forum rules this morning. So either you have hacked into my computer or you are, in real life, Mrs. Snooze. I am not sure which possibility is more disturbing.
In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them. The human body was knocked up pretty late on the Friday afternoon, with a deadline looming. How well do you expect it to work?

User avatar
Boustrophedon
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2860
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:58 pm
Location: Lincolnshire Wolds

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Boustrophedon » Wed Mar 04, 2020 11:38 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 1:50 pm
Some people are immune from social embarrassment. Like a spin-off from narcissistic personality disorder - they can undergo public humiliation yet not feel it. They just carry on without a scratch on their feelings.

I suspect a lot of the people named and shamed simply won't have any reaction.
It's the reverse of virtue signalling. In effect it says to the world "I am rich and powerful and privileged enough to be able to say this horrible thing and it won't affect me because I am rich and etc."

It's a peacock's tail, a suit of Swabian armour or a gold plated Lambo; it says look at the size of my f.cking balls*, it's an advertisement of unassailable social standing, a big f.ck you to everyone else.

*OK so not Katie Hopkins but the principle stands.
Hjulet snurrar men hamstern är död.

FlammableFlower
Dorkwood
Posts: 1508
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:22 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by FlammableFlower » Thu Mar 05, 2020 7:14 am

These, in this case in the Bristol Post, are not rich. Well, they don't appear to be.
They posted this abuse on a public Facebook page using their public profiles. It's not exactly that much different than if they shouted it in the street. And in those circumstances I don't see that there's any reason not to publicly announce who they are. Whether or not they then reflect on their behaviour is another thing. They certainly wouldn't have done so if not called out, they would have been had tacit reinforcement that their behaviour was acceptable.

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by lpm » Thu Mar 05, 2020 8:42 am

A form of wolf whistling? There, the whistler is intending it not as a communication to the woman, but to the men around him. It's saying "I'm an alpha male, I've got the guts to harass and I don't give a sh.t for disapproval". It's a pretence at being rich in terms of self esteem, rich in confidence, bigness of character, rather than rich in £.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Mar 05, 2020 11:16 am

Globally, practically everybody in the UK is rich in £, in the sense that they live in a society able to shield them from the worst impacts of climate change (while continuing to contribute to its exacerbation).

The people currently at risk or actually dying are in the poor countries of the global south.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Mar 06, 2020 7:53 am

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Mar 05, 2020 11:16 am
Globally, practically everybody in the UK is rich in £, in the sense that they live in a society able to shield them from the worst impacts of climate change (while continuing to contribute to its exacerbation).

The people currently at risk or actually dying are in the poor countries of the global south.
Yes, indeed.

greyspoke
Fuzzable
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:36 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by greyspoke » Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:47 am

lpm wrote:
Thu Mar 05, 2020 8:42 am
A form of wolf whistling? There, the whistler is intending it not as a communication to the woman, but to the men around him. It's saying "I'm an alpha male, I've got the guts to harass and I don't give a sh.t for disapproval". It's a pretence at being rich in terms of self esteem, rich in confidence, bigness of character, rather than rich in £.
Are you sure this is true of all wolf whistling? Anyway, your mention of it caused me to look up the origin of it, which is a bit interesting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf-whistling

User avatar
shpalman
Princess POW
Posts: 8241
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
Location: One step beyond
Contact:

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by shpalman » Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:51 am

lpm wrote:
Thu Mar 05, 2020 8:42 am
A form of wolf whistling? There, the whistler is intending it not as a communication to the woman, but to the men around him. It's saying "I'm an alpha male, I've got the guts to harass and I don't give a sh.t for disapproval". It's a pretence at being rich in terms of self esteem, rich in confidence, bigness of character, rather than rich in £.
Ah sort of a wolf dog-whistle then?
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Mar 06, 2020 9:56 am

snoozeofreason wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:58 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:42 pm
Though of course you all know that as you look at the rules every morning.
I genuinely was looking at the forum rules this morning. So either you have hacked into my computer or you are, in real life, Mrs. Snooze. I am not sure which possibility is more disturbing.
I promise that I'm not in fact your wife. Nor have I hacked your computer. There must be another explanation.

bmforre
Snowbonk
Posts: 504
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:15 pm
Location: Trondheim

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by bmforre » Fri Mar 06, 2020 10:26 am

Is'nt the hefty implement your avatar carries a powerful hacking tool?

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Mar 06, 2020 10:36 am

bmforre wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 10:26 am
Is'nt the hefty implement your avatar carries a powerful hacking tool?
An elegant weapon for a more civilized age.

User avatar
Tessa K
Light of Blast
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Tessa K » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:10 pm

Fishnut wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 1:38 pm
Does anyone have any information on the effectiveness of shaming people like this? I've had a very quick look in Google Scholar but I couldn't find anything particularly relevant.
I'd like to know that too.

I'm trying to avoid any kind of cognitive bias in thinking about who it's OK to publicly shame but I do think that adult politicians and public figures are fair game. They always have been in whatever media existed at the time. Not that this makes it right but strongly worded dissent or disapproval or even mockery comes with the territory. Think about the sometimes quite vicious cartoons about public figures in the 18th century, eg the work of Gillray, Rowlandson and Cruikshank.

I'm uneasy but not totally against ad hom comments about this sort of person in some contexts but would draw the line at punching down for sure. Any kind of sexism, racism, homophobia etc is separate from ad homs in my mind.

When adult males start picking on teenage girls I do get pretty feisty and protective though. I hope that the Bristol incident will give people pause for thought before posting and that the offenders have to have some serious conversations about their behaviour at work and socially. I doubt that this will affect the larger world of vile people posting vileness though.

Putting someone in the stocks and chucking rotten food at them is an old tradition to highlight unacceptable behaviour in a community. Is the Bristol incident a modern version of this?

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:13 pm

Tessa K wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:10 pm
Fishnut wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 1:38 pm
Does anyone have any information on the effectiveness of shaming people like this? I've had a very quick look in Google Scholar but I couldn't find anything particularly relevant.
I'd like to know that too.
It apparently can have a profound impact. Jon Ronson wrote a book called So You've Been Publicly Shamed a few years back about online shamings. I read some reviews years ago, but haven't read the book.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Stephanie
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2896
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:38 pm
Location: clinging tenaciously to your buttocks

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Stephanie » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:23 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:13 pm
Tessa K wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 12:10 pm
Fishnut wrote:
Tue Mar 03, 2020 1:38 pm
Does anyone have any information on the effectiveness of shaming people like this? I've had a very quick look in Google Scholar but I couldn't find anything particularly relevant.
I'd like to know that too.
It apparently can have a profound impact. Jon Ronson wrote a book called So You've Been Publicly Shamed a few years back about online shamings. I read some reviews years ago, but haven't read the book.
I have actually read it. It sort of depended on the target for me. There was one part that he received some criticism for, which was the Adria Richards story. She called out some men for making sexual jokes at a conference, resulting in one of them losing his job. The outrage then swung the other way, leading to Richards losing her job. The man quickly got another job. She did not. Ronson seemed much less sympathetic to her, which was a bit odd really.

There was some interesting stuff in there about reputation management, ie people creating lots of fake profiles and sites to dilute the results so that people can get away from their bad press.
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by lpm » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:25 pm

At a nearby primary school, the police did a thing where they pulled over cars speeding past the school.

They didn't lecture or fine the drivers. They got the drivers out their cars and in front of the children, who asked them questions about why they were speeding.

Quite a lot of commentators felt the punishment was excessive, that it was far too humiliating to be hauled in front of children relative to the usual fines and courses and 3 points on the licence. But I bet it was effective.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
discovolante
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4084
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by discovolante » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:34 pm

lpm wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:25 pm
At a nearby primary school, the police did a thing where they pulled over cars speeding past the school.

They didn't lecture or fine the drivers. They got the drivers out their cars and in front of the children, who asked them questions about why they were speeding.

Quite a lot of commentators felt the punishment was excessive, that it was far too humiliating to be hauled in front of children relative to the usual fines and courses and 3 points on the licence. But I bet it was effective.
'Goodness me, I didn't expect my decision to put children's lives at risk to have consequences.'
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.

User avatar
Tessa K
Light of Blast
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: Shaming online abusers

Post by Tessa K » Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:19 pm

lpm wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:25 pm
At a nearby primary school, the police did a thing where they pulled over cars speeding past the school.

They didn't lecture or fine the drivers. They got the drivers out their cars and in front of the children, who asked them questions about why they were speeding.

Quite a lot of commentators felt the punishment was excessive, that it was far too humiliating to be hauled in front of children relative to the usual fines and courses and 3 points on the licence. But I bet it was effective.
Oh no, humiliating adults in front of children. More of this sort of thing would be excellent.

It's like the posters in London Underground with photos of kids and comments about how upset their parents get when they're abused at work on the Tube. Charities have long known that personalising stories and seeing the consequences of your actions gets better results - in a positive way. So why not do it for harmful behaviour too?

Post Reply