Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Sign in to follow this  
hissingsid

Interesting questions tabled for next weeks Tynwald

Recommended Posts

I am sure that there would have to be a complaint made before any action could be taken and I very much doubt any of the contributors to this forum would make a complaint against a fellow member it is very much tit for tat, although quite a lot of tat that goes on between members all banter although sometimes a bit hot and heavy.   As for the MHKs I do not think Daphne would stand up n court and accuse people of calling her daft just because she wanted to cull helpless wild animals or Jason would call anyone to account for dwelling on his obsession with seagulls, when it gets a bit deeper there are ways of couching  politicians moments of glory without being specific a few clues here and there and people would soon catch on.I am sure the AGs office will not look at this bill too kindly they seem to be quite busy with drugs and things.   It is indeed interesting times we live in.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

 I very much doubt any of the contributors to this forum would make a complaint against a fellow member it is very much tit for tat, although quite a lot of tat that goes on between members all banter although sometimes a bit hot and heavy. 

 

Anonymous internet forum member becomes upset and hurt at what another anonymous internet forum said about them.

It will make an interesting police investigation and court case and will give the Isle of Man the worldwide publicity it craves.

 

Edited by gettafa
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, gettafa said:

Anonymous internet forum member becomes upset and hurt at what another anonymous internet forum said about them.

It will make an interesting police investigation and court case and will give the Isle of Man the worldwide publicity it craves.

 

We all know who will be up at police HQ the day after that clause becomes law as they seem to be totally bent out of shape about any form of criticism that appears anywhere on the internet. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Cheesy Wheezy said:

I would say it would be more likely - anonymous Internet forum user hounded by self-important MHK to find out who that anonymous forum poster is. As John Wright said the other night it will just put more pressure on the Mods to delete posts or provide IP details and other identifiers to the Police to get the self-important person off their backs. It’s not really going to end up in the courts but will still waste a huge amount of time for all concerned and result in direct censorship on social media and here as people (understandably) just want to avoid all the hassle. 

The seeds of this this little issue we’re sowed years ago by Geoff Corkish the then MLC (who called for social media and Manx Forums to be banned) and a few other MHKs who in realty hated ‘keyboard warriors’. These ‘saintly’ politicos who despise criticism of their actions either satiricalły or factually. They hate Manx Forums and it’s predecessor especially if it shows them to be the idiot that they truly were. The most pathetic thing is Politicos like to use this site when it suits them to bore their constituents to death with non stop diatribe defending IOMG. As for that Facebook site IOMNP, Politicos swarm to that site like flies around shit and bees around honey. Granted you can’t hide behind pen names. The Politicos like it as they won’t face any real arguments or nasty comments about their latest comments or actions. The administration clamp down on descent and any real ‘nasty’ comments left. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 2112 said:

Politicos swarm to that site like flies around shit and bees around honey.

I like your balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Politicians have to be encouraged to contribute on social media

Edited by Donald Trumps
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, 2112 said:

As for that Facebook site IOMNP, Politicos swarm to that site like flies around shit and bees around honey. Granted you can’t hide behind pen names. The Politicos like it as they won’t face any real arguments or nasty comments about their latest comments or actions. The administration clamp down on descent and any real ‘nasty’ comments left. 

I’m not sure they do swarm to it. It’s mainly still the Rob Callister news service. He asked a question about tree stumps this week. It was splashed all over there like he’d just brokered a peace deal in Syria. Other than that Chris Thomas posts a bit but he posts all over the place (even here!). Hooper every now and again and Alf Cannan and Cretney once or twice and that’s about it. A few MLCs have posted very sparingly. Quayle is hardly going to post as he serially calls him fat and stupid in that weird Manx envy way that he has for people who are obviously richer than him. Another MHK seems to claim regularly that she had been banned despite the regular abuse he posts up there several times a week which presumably she can’t responsd to if she is banned. But you’re right it’s like flies around shit; as it’s basically a pile of shit run by a man who clearly has anger management and mental health issues. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the worst drafted pieces of legislation I have ever seen. Absolutely unworkable with no clear definitions. Any defence lawyer worth his salt would run a horse and cart through it. For example define abusive language! I can call my Missus anything apart from calling her a "Cow" then Armageadon hits.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But..but... it' s a very good piece of legislation - Lawrie Hooper MHK said it was word for word from New Zealand legislation. 

Lawrie isn't stupid. He told me himself.

Edited by gettafa
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, gettafa said:

Anonymous internet forum member becomes upset and hurt at what another anonymous internet forum said about them.

It will make an interesting police investigation and court case and will give the Isle of Man the worldwide publicity it craves.

 

Well are we really anonymous?

Guaby proved that people who post here can't hide behind the claim to be anonymous for the comments they make.

It works the other way too quite few user names are known to belong to an individual. "Wrighty operates drunk.", "Rhumsaa is nicking funds from the commissioners" would be untruths that are difficult to defend in a libel court even if only the user name was used. 

If every post Rog made was immediately followed by an anti-Semitic post from the same poster that has to be religious harassment even if Rog is anonymous. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very dangerous path to be going down.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends on the definition of harm for me. Being annoyed or upset because you've lost an argument doesn't constitute harm. Being offended isn't harm. Harassment, discrimination, abuse, lies, bullying can cause harm. 

But aren't there already laws against those things?

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Rog said:

This is a very dangerous path to be going down.

You are absolutely right Rog.

The Isle of Man courts can be funny places and certainly something like this, you can forget about impartiality. A deemster's own bias, personal feelings and ignorance will prevail. But I suppose on such a small Island where a judge can brag in his cups that they know who is guilty before a case comes to court, wasn't it always thus.

 

Edited by gettafa
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Declan said:

It all depends on the definition of harm for me. Being annoyed or upset because you've lost an argument doesn't constitute harm. Being offended isn't harm. Harassment, discrimination, abuse, lies, bullying can cause harm. 

But aren't there already laws against those things?

 

I note a weasel word being used.

Reasonable. 

In English courts as being the interpretation of a thing as would be viewed by a man "on the Clapham Omnibus"..

I do wonder what will be used in the Manx courts as the definition of reasonable and in the probable inappropriateness of the Clapham Omnibus will the definition involve a horse tram?  After all those who might be offended are mostly horses ass's there would be some justification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rog said:

I note a weasel word being used.

Reasonable. 

No room for reason in Rog's world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...