Caroline farrow support thread 2

[ilovejeffgoldblum]

Hi I'm a long time lurker, who read with disgust the last thread and wants to send , to caro. I've scanned since last thread finished for new one but no luck! Hope no one minds if I start one!

I see someone is having a wee twitter tantrum.

My DH ( who is totally freaked out learning about what’s happening to Caro ) and I send you Caroline.

Thanks Mr Jessica

It’s just extraordinary what’s happening in plain sight. It’s as though people are goading and provoking for a reaction.

what I don't understand is why they're pinning tweets stating how wrong it is (the extreme trolling of Caro) whilst at the same time posting a torrent of ongoing tweets about Caro, all of which are unpleasant at best, downright horrid and toxic at worst? Wtf is that about?

Narcissists do all kinds of strange irrational things

For anyone who missed it

medium.com/@OwnYourReality/flying-monkeys-the-narcissists-tool-for-the-smear-campaign-798daf7a59c0

It's funny. I marvel at someone thinking they know loads about defamation and libel in the press and social media going after an organisation run by Justin Roberts (who talked about regulation of blogging six years ago) and is married to the former deputy editor of the guardian, editor of newsnight, and programme director of c4.

I would imagine that Justine has had more than a few conversations about media law, media ethics and how the two work in practice as well as principle over dinner.

It's the wholesale, unregulated, unstoppable misogyny that makes them think Justine Roberts should just shut the fuck up because she's a woman.

Still attention seeking. Now wants a database with people's real names.

twitter.com/flyinglawyer73/status/1114612766520815616?s=19

"Sounds good. What we do is have an index based on social media usernames then information fields such as real name, history etc, you get the drift."

Grey Rock 🙉

I just had a check of the twitter feed.. what stuck me (actually more than the latest attempt to intimidate) was the male patterns of speech.

I think it's interesting some people go to such lengths to try to adapt the physical whereas often it's the speech patterns, posture and mannerisms that leap out and signal the sex one is

There are some politicians who are in favour of this idea because politicians have received so much abuse as they think this is a way of stopping it. However there are others who feel it will particularly disenfranchise women from the internet (Jess Phillips I believe is one I can name) and is therefore misogynistic in nature. MN have long been on record as opposing this, which is precisely why they allow name changing to protect women.

There is also the issue of who hold this type of data base and who has access to it. And whether that can be abused for all manner of reasons. Again because of the dominance of men in the IT field, this particularly disenfranchises women.

Facebook / Cambridge Analytica etc has demonstrated how much it is at risk of political manipulation and exploitation against the populace. It places too much power in the hands of too few.

And don't get me started of the vulnerability of such powerful data to hackers and those who might seek to use it for criminal means.

Not that government databases have a great track record for cost, completion time, effectiveness or just about anything much really. They tend to be shocking things.

We also already know that social media algorithms are heavily weighted against women and race. Mainly because of who writes these algorithms and it reflecting their prejudices - only on an industrial scale.

This kind of list making and beaucracy doesn't have a pretty history either. It's incredibly authoritarian. Regimes that have this level of social control haven't really worked out terribly well, particularly for women and children.

So given the history of this particular debate about free speech and reduction of abuse on the Internet - which is disproportionately against women and ethic groups, to make such a suggestion really only reflects a white male supremist agenda.

Funny how every action reveals the same pattern and a complete lack of knowledge, empathy or understanding of women's lack of power in society.

Yeah, the only thing I really favour lists for is organizing jobs.

The kind of list with personal data that totalitarian bullies make are never, ever a good thing.

From someone with various aliases who likes to hide their violent criminal past, it’s very hypocritical... again, not uncovering any men over on Kiwifarms?

Oh they do love a list and a spreadsheet don’t they?

And they usually soooo well researched.

What was that one from the ‘Labour against Transphobia’ group.

Bill Baggins*

*possibly not real name

Y’think? Utter, utter morons.

Once again Caroline

Isn't it illegal to mine and hold data without the express permission of the person whose data you are holding and without being fully open as to why you hold that data?

m.youtube.com/watch?v=G1HwKA0J-gU

When comedy says it all

Not sure that registering a list like that with the ICO would be legal

ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/does-an-organisation-need-my-consent/
Data stored about you without you explicit consent needs to full under one of five other reasons

The six lawful bases for using data are:

Consent
Contract
Legal Obligation
Vital interests
Public task
Legitimate interests

The only two justifications that could be used are:
What is the vital interest basis?
An organisation might use this to protect your life or the life of someone else.

Now I don't see how you could argue this, unless people started to threaten physical violence and who ever had a database like this would also have to demonstrate that it couldn't be used to harm others. I'm guess shouting die in a fire or using it to sue the shit out of everyone wouldn't really cut it.

The other one is the legitimate task
^What is the legitimate interests basis?
An organisation might be able to use your data for legitimate business interests.^

Legitimate interests is likely to be used in situations where the organisation is using your personal data in ways you would reasonably expect and which are low-risk and won’t have a big impact on you, or if the organisation has a compelling reason for the impact.

But crucially:

You can object to the use of your data when the organisation is using this basis, which means the organisation has to think about whether they should be using your data and, if they decide to continue using it, give a very strong reason to justify why.

It'd just take one complaint to bring the whole thing down.

Otherwise we are really into the land of dystopia with
What is the public task basis?
An organisation might use this if it performs a task in the public interest or for its official functions.

Public authorities (eg local councils, government departments, NHS bodies etc) are likely to rely on this basis for a lot of the personal data they process.

It's amazing when you actually check the legal details on these things.

Jessica so true.

I wonder why it's this forum that they're targeting, and twitter-users who are women, mothers, etc. Not Kiwifarms? (Hint to those who may not know- most of Kiwfarms are men)

There seem to be so many men who would like others to think they are women, and men who support them, who are incensed that women like Caro, and others, aren't rolling over and capitulating to their demands.

It must be infuritating for them.

And Caro is on the end of their fury. Which we can all see. It's not doing their argument much good, to be honest.

It's amazing when you actually check the legal details on these things.

Isn’t it though?

I am thinking of calling myself a Lawyer.

What do you reckon?

Is it hate speech to point out the plan is probably unlawful?

Will my name go on the list for it?

for Caro,
No other comment really.

I am thinking of calling myself a Lawyer

You go for it hun!

I had actually always assumed you were a legal bod

flyinglawyer73 tweeted that to provoke a reaction. That's why they included @MumsnetTowers.

We need to be wary of getting drawn into these games. If you look at a behaviour of many high-profile TRA types it's clear they get off on it.

Lawyer doesn't know the relevant law, oops.

Admit they want a reaction nauticant and are getting off on it but equally they are making themselves look incredibly silly and I don't think that's quite the look they are going for.

Nope I'm not a legal bod. I was taught basic principles of law as part of media course. Journalism is closely related traditionally because reporters used to sit in courts, so it was deemed worthwhile to understand stuff. Plus knowledge of media ethics and law are pretty much essential if you are serious about the media as a career. You can't go printing stuff about people without understanding 'in the public interest' and having it tattooed on your head. Even if it's to dodge the practical application of law. The same with politics to a large extent.

Not that I ever went into media in the end.

Once you know the most basic principles, law is fairly easy to get a basic grasp of. It's pretty logical. And since media and politics are my interest, basic understanding of how the law works and what it is just interesting to me. Nerd that I am.

It's often not hard to check stuff with Google. There is nothing I like more than showing up someone spouting utter bollocks and pretending they are all superior in status. I think it's a public service to take 5 minutes to look stuff up rather than swallow the crap.