Is this how we should handle Dick Pics?

[mecegirl]

There are like two threads today on one of the the subreddits I go to about women's responses to dick pics.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrollXChro.../guy_sends_me_dick_pic_i_sent_it_to_his_wife/
https://www.reddit.com/r/TrollXChro..._thanks_to_ucoolstuff00012_i_now_have_my_new/

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

There are like two threads today on one of the the subreddits I go to about women's responses to dick pics.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrollXChro.../guy_sends_me_dick_pic_i_sent_it_to_his_wife/
https://www.reddit.com/r/TrollXChro..._thanks_to_ucoolstuff00012_i_now_have_my_new/

*Sigh* Maybe this WILL be remembered as the "Era of Rampant Dick Pics" after all. It is a bit ridiculous it is as bad as it is.

 

[runic knight]

The idea of shaming people for their own stupidity is one I can't really argue against in principle. If they flashing their junk at people who most likely want nothing to do with them or it, they are asking for a bit of mockery at the very least. That said, I do have to wonder about the practicality and the justness of how it is being done. On the one side, this seems to be baiting more dick pics from people either with no care of their family's opinions of them, or simply because they get off on that sort of thing. Or they may feel it a challenge and specifically rain dick pics or worse on them just because of the predictable reaction. On the other, I am not sure I like the self righteous vigilantism of it, especially given the ease of harm the would-be backlash can do to people who aren't actually involved. Steal a pic online, hack a phone or email, spoof an IP, lot of ways to mislead where things come from, or even intentional frame others for it. Considering this is presented through Jezebel, from, well, people I don't trust in any degree of personal responsibility, restraint, or even fair examination when it comes to their personal politics or ideology, I have a lot of doubts about the idea. Reminds me a little too much of the open carry nutters for comfort; both groups of people looking for an excuse to show off how much of a "good guy" they are by way of punishing others.

Not saying I think it is too common an occurrence at the moment, but change the dynamic of how people respond and watch people take advantage of that change. This would-be solution seems it will cause more issues and more serious issues to others. When you risk harming the lives of people just to counter a troll, I think the troll has well and truly won.

I think that will subside though when the laws catch up to include electronic communications. As it is, in most places it is illegal to send dick pics via snail mail, they just have not updated them to include modern communications in many places. It is happening slowly, and will get there in time, in the meantime this is one of the only options people have to combat it. If they do not want people to have to handle it themselves, they need to update the laws accordingly so people have someone they can call to have something done about it. We are just in this " in between stage" where it is running rampant because people have no recourse.

It is crazy though that this has gone on as long as it has without having laws updated more often... I am sure they do not want to look back on this time in internet history as "Era of Rampant Dicks", instead of people having shootouts over poker matches like the wild west they are fighting dick pics with dick pics..

Though if someone flashes someone in person, the person who was flashed has every right to tell their family what they did. They talk to news reporters, and the whole world finds out what they did , so I am not really seeing that as a problem here for them doing it online as well.

I agree, the law should be adjusted, sensibly, to have some means to deal with people sending unwanted stuff like that. Would probably be hard to word the language to not be weaponized though between ex's who have shared nudes or similar things. We've seen the lack of care about similar things on sites like facebook or youtube where the claim of nudity is enough to cause trouble for accounts, adding a legal repercussion to that instead of a commercial one would have to be done with care.

As for people having a right to inform others, that isn't the point of contention here. I think the problem is tied with the anonymity of it all and the ease to cause issues for people in a rush to play the hero vigilante. Like I said, it reminds me a lot of the open carry people. Both do have the right to do it, but both aren't prone to being very sensible with that applying right. And much like the open carry people, there is a lot of swaggering and showboating, and a far greater risk of issue because of it.

So I suppose my stance is, I see and agree with the concept, but I am weary as hell of the application of it and the harm it can cause.

It isn't hard to word, they just have to add " electronic communications" to existing laws that address snail mail. They already have laws that address this, they just need to be updated to include modern communications. I do not see the internet as "anonymous" though, rather I see it as very public, and permanent. I think it is peoples ignorance that makes them have a false sense of anonymity, because they should not be putting anything online they would not say to a judge since everything they do online is considered public and able to be used against them in a court of law. Their own ignorance of this really isn't an excuse for them to "think" it is private. No one ever told them it was.

That isn't what I meant by the issue with anonymous here though. I was referring to the lack of actually knowing who is on the other side of the computer with certainty, not with the people who think they are anonymous behind facebook posts, and how those who are so eager to play vigilante open the door for harming innocents due to their lack of dedication to properly vetting the people they accuse or stalk in pursuit of shaming. Open carry comparisons and all that.

As for the internet itself being public, not really sure how any of that relates to my initial point. Doesn't really make it less of a concern that would-be vigilantes being over zealous in their pursuit of punishing people.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

The idea of shaming people for their own stupidity is one I can't really argue against in principle. If they flashing their junk at people who most likely want nothing to do with them or it, they are asking for a bit of mockery at the very least. That said, I do have to wonder about the practicality and the justness of how it is being done. On the one side, this seems to be baiting more dick pics from people either with no care of their family's opinions of them, or simply because they get off on that sort of thing. Or they may feel it a challenge and specifically rain dick pics or worse on them just because of the predictable reaction. On the other, I am not sure I like the self righteous vigilantism of it, especially given the ease of harm the would-be backlash can do to people who aren't actually involved. Steal a pic online, hack a phone or email, spoof an IP, lot of ways to mislead where things come from, or even intentional frame others for it. Considering this is presented through Jezebel, from, well, people I don't trust in any degree of personal responsibility, restraint, or even fair examination when it comes to their personal politics or ideology, I have a lot of doubts about the idea. Reminds me a little too much of the open carry nutters for comfort; both groups of people looking for an excuse to show off how much of a "good guy" they are by way of punishing others.

Not saying I think it is too common an occurrence at the moment, but change the dynamic of how people respond and watch people take advantage of that change. This would-be solution seems it will cause more issues and more serious issues to others. When you risk harming the lives of people just to counter a troll, I think the troll has well and truly won.

I think that will subside though when the laws catch up to include electronic communications. As it is, in most places it is illegal to send dick pics via snail mail, they just have not updated them to include modern communications in many places. It is happening slowly, and will get there in time, in the meantime this is one of the only options people have to combat it. If they do not want people to have to handle it themselves, they need to update the laws accordingly so people have someone they can call to have something done about it. We are just in this " in between stage" where it is running rampant because people have no recourse.

It is crazy though that this has gone on as long as it has without having laws updated more often... I am sure they do not want to look back on this time in internet history as "Era of Rampant Dicks", instead of people having shootouts over poker matches like the wild west they are fighting dick pics with dick pics..

Though if someone flashes someone in person, the person who was flashed has every right to tell their family what they did. They talk to news reporters, and the whole world finds out what they did , so I am not really seeing that as a problem here for them doing it online as well.

I agree, the law should be adjusted, sensibly, to have some means to deal with people sending unwanted stuff like that. Would probably be hard to word the language to not be weaponized though between ex's who have shared nudes or similar things. We've seen the lack of care about similar things on sites like facebook or youtube where the claim of nudity is enough to cause trouble for accounts, adding a legal repercussion to that instead of a commercial one would have to be done with care.

As for people having a right to inform others, that isn't the point of contention here. I think the problem is tied with the anonymity of it all and the ease to cause issues for people in a rush to play the hero vigilante. Like I said, it reminds me a lot of the open carry people. Both do have the right to do it, but both aren't prone to being very sensible with that applying right. And much like the open carry people, there is a lot of swaggering and showboating, and a far greater risk of issue because of it.

So I suppose my stance is, I see and agree with the concept, but I am weary as hell of the application of it and the harm it can cause.

It isn't hard to word, they just have to add " electronic communications" to existing laws that address snail mail. They already have laws that address this, they just need to be updated to include modern communications. I do not see the internet as "anonymous" though, rather I see it as very public, and permanent. I think it is peoples ignorance that makes them have a false sense of anonymity, because they should not be putting anything online they would not say to a judge since everything they do online is considered public and able to be used against them in a court of law. Their own ignorance of this really isn't an excuse for them to "think" it is private. No one ever told them it was.

That isn't what I meant by the issue with anonymous here though. I was referring to the lack of actually knowing who is on the other side of the computer with certainty, not with the people who think they are anonymous behind facebook posts, and how those who are so eager to play vigilante open the door for harming innocents due to their lack of dedication to properly vetting the people they accuse or stalk in pursuit of shaming. Open carry comparisons and all that.

As for the internet itself being public, not really sure how any of that relates to my initial point. Doesn't really make it less of a concern that would-be vigilantes being over zealous in their pursuit of punishing people.

I think it is the same thing though. regardless of if it is someone sending a dick pic via email or posting something online somewhere, it is still all the same in regards to anonymity. They are actually more anonymous, not less by sending it via snail mail, and yet they still caught many of the guys doing this stuff back then as well. Do we need to make sure the dick matches the perp? XD

You are afraid they would misplace blame? Someone else was using their account or spoofing? That is much more unlikely though in cases such as sending random dick pics.. I can see it as being likely in messing with friends and acquaintances, but not as much in regards to random strangers. I mean, yes I DID put an inflatable sheep in my friends bed with Ky jelly and a pink thong as a prank for when his date came over to his apartment for the first time.. but see that is different because it is with people you know.. I can't see why people would do that randomly to people they don't know, what would be the fun in that? Besides, you wouldn't even see their reaction.

 

[runic knight]

The idea of shaming people for their own stupidity is one I can't really argue against in principle. If they flashing their junk at people who most likely want nothing to do with them or it, they are asking for a bit of mockery at the very least. That said, I do have to wonder about the practicality and the justness of how it is being done. On the one side, this seems to be baiting more dick pics from people either with no care of their family's opinions of them, or simply because they get off on that sort of thing. Or they may feel it a challenge and specifically rain dick pics or worse on them just because of the predictable reaction. On the other, I am not sure I like the self righteous vigilantism of it, especially given the ease of harm the would-be backlash can do to people who aren't actually involved. Steal a pic online, hack a phone or email, spoof an IP, lot of ways to mislead where things come from, or even intentional frame others for it. Considering this is presented through Jezebel, from, well, people I don't trust in any degree of personal responsibility, restraint, or even fair examination when it comes to their personal politics or ideology, I have a lot of doubts about the idea. Reminds me a little too much of the open carry nutters for comfort; both groups of people looking for an excuse to show off how much of a "good guy" they are by way of punishing others.

Not saying I think it is too common an occurrence at the moment, but change the dynamic of how people respond and watch people take advantage of that change. This would-be solution seems it will cause more issues and more serious issues to others. When you risk harming the lives of people just to counter a troll, I think the troll has well and truly won.

I think that will subside though when the laws catch up to include electronic communications. As it is, in most places it is illegal to send dick pics via snail mail, they just have not updated them to include modern communications in many places. It is happening slowly, and will get there in time, in the meantime this is one of the only options people have to combat it. If they do not want people to have to handle it themselves, they need to update the laws accordingly so people have someone they can call to have something done about it. We are just in this " in between stage" where it is running rampant because people have no recourse.

It is crazy though that this has gone on as long as it has without having laws updated more often... I am sure they do not want to look back on this time in internet history as "Era of Rampant Dicks", instead of people having shootouts over poker matches like the wild west they are fighting dick pics with dick pics..

Though if someone flashes someone in person, the person who was flashed has every right to tell their family what they did. They talk to news reporters, and the whole world finds out what they did , so I am not really seeing that as a problem here for them doing it online as well.

I agree, the law should be adjusted, sensibly, to have some means to deal with people sending unwanted stuff like that. Would probably be hard to word the language to not be weaponized though between ex's who have shared nudes or similar things. We've seen the lack of care about similar things on sites like facebook or youtube where the claim of nudity is enough to cause trouble for accounts, adding a legal repercussion to that instead of a commercial one would have to be done with care.

As for people having a right to inform others, that isn't the point of contention here. I think the problem is tied with the anonymity of it all and the ease to cause issues for people in a rush to play the hero vigilante. Like I said, it reminds me a lot of the open carry people. Both do have the right to do it, but both aren't prone to being very sensible with that applying right. And much like the open carry people, there is a lot of swaggering and showboating, and a far greater risk of issue because of it.

So I suppose my stance is, I see and agree with the concept, but I am weary as hell of the application of it and the harm it can cause.

It isn't hard to word, they just have to add " electronic communications" to existing laws that address snail mail. They already have laws that address this, they just need to be updated to include modern communications. I do not see the internet as "anonymous" though, rather I see it as very public, and permanent. I think it is peoples ignorance that makes them have a false sense of anonymity, because they should not be putting anything online they would not say to a judge since everything they do online is considered public and able to be used against them in a court of law. Their own ignorance of this really isn't an excuse for them to "think" it is private. No one ever told them it was.

That isn't what I meant by the issue with anonymous here though. I was referring to the lack of actually knowing who is on the other side of the computer with certainty, not with the people who think they are anonymous behind facebook posts, and how those who are so eager to play vigilante open the door for harming innocents due to their lack of dedication to properly vetting the people they accuse or stalk in pursuit of shaming. Open carry comparisons and all that.

As for the internet itself being public, not really sure how any of that relates to my initial point. Doesn't really make it less of a concern that would-be vigilantes being over zealous in their pursuit of punishing people.

I think it is the same thing though. regardless of if it is someone sending a dick pic via email or posting something online somewhere, it is still all the same in regards to anonymity. They are actually more anonymous, not less by sending it via snail mail, and yet they still caught many of the guys doing this stuff back then as well. Do we need to make sure the dick matches the perp? XD

You are afraid they would misplace blame? Someone else was using their account or spoofing? That is much more unlikely though in cases such as sending random dick pics.. I can see it as being likely in messing with friends and acquaintances, but not as much in regards to random strangers. I mean, yes I DID put an inflatable sheep in my friends bed with Ky jelly and a pink thong as a prank for when his date came over to his apartment for the first time.. but see that is different because it is with people you know.. I can't see why people would do that randomly to people they don't know, what would be the fun in that? Besides, you wouldn't even see their reaction.

While not impossible it would be done to mess with people, I was more relating to the various ways that make ID-ing hard to pinpoint online because of the nature of how those ID-ings are done. Yes, there is the more tech-savy methods of spoofing and proxy usage, but there is also the fact there are limits to how effective initial searches can be to track down someone online. How many times have users on the escapist itself been hit with permabans for sharing the same IP or other trigger as a banjumping account that have been later overturned? Hell, some dumb kid using his dad's phone instead of his own could create a mess as well. Or if an image that is used to ID someone is simply lifted from google or somewhere else and claimed to be their own by another person.

The problem is that the methods to detect and track people online are not foolproof to begin with and should require some good follow through before being seen as reliable proof to act upon anything. The sort of people who are acting the vigilante and eagerly rushing into shaming and punishing others are not the sort I trust to put any needed restraint to make sure they aren't swinging wide.

As I said from the start, the idea of shaming someone for their own stupidity is not one I object to, just the nature of how it is being accomplished here and the opportunity for more problems for more people this sort of vigilantism can cause.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

The idea of shaming people for their own stupidity is one I can't really argue against in principle. If they flashing their junk at people who most likely want nothing to do with them or it, they are asking for a bit of mockery at the very least. That said, I do have to wonder about the practicality and the justness of how it is being done. On the one side, this seems to be baiting more dick pics from people either with no care of their family's opinions of them, or simply because they get off on that sort of thing. Or they may feel it a challenge and specifically rain dick pics or worse on them just because of the predictable reaction. On the other, I am not sure I like the self righteous vigilantism of it, especially given the ease of harm the would-be backlash can do to people who aren't actually involved. Steal a pic online, hack a phone or email, spoof an IP, lot of ways to mislead where things come from, or even intentional frame others for it. Considering this is presented through Jezebel, from, well, people I don't trust in any degree of personal responsibility, restraint, or even fair examination when it comes to their personal politics or ideology, I have a lot of doubts about the idea. Reminds me a little too much of the open carry nutters for comfort; both groups of people looking for an excuse to show off how much of a "good guy" they are by way of punishing others.

Not saying I think it is too common an occurrence at the moment, but change the dynamic of how people respond and watch people take advantage of that change. This would-be solution seems it will cause more issues and more serious issues to others. When you risk harming the lives of people just to counter a troll, I think the troll has well and truly won.

I think that will subside though when the laws catch up to include electronic communications. As it is, in most places it is illegal to send dick pics via snail mail, they just have not updated them to include modern communications in many places. It is happening slowly, and will get there in time, in the meantime this is one of the only options people have to combat it. If they do not want people to have to handle it themselves, they need to update the laws accordingly so people have someone they can call to have something done about it. We are just in this " in between stage" where it is running rampant because people have no recourse.

It is crazy though that this has gone on as long as it has without having laws updated more often... I am sure they do not want to look back on this time in internet history as "Era of Rampant Dicks", instead of people having shootouts over poker matches like the wild west they are fighting dick pics with dick pics..

Though if someone flashes someone in person, the person who was flashed has every right to tell their family what they did. They talk to news reporters, and the whole world finds out what they did , so I am not really seeing that as a problem here for them doing it online as well.

I agree, the law should be adjusted, sensibly, to have some means to deal with people sending unwanted stuff like that. Would probably be hard to word the language to not be weaponized though between ex's who have shared nudes or similar things. We've seen the lack of care about similar things on sites like facebook or youtube where the claim of nudity is enough to cause trouble for accounts, adding a legal repercussion to that instead of a commercial one would have to be done with care.

As for people having a right to inform others, that isn't the point of contention here. I think the problem is tied with the anonymity of it all and the ease to cause issues for people in a rush to play the hero vigilante. Like I said, it reminds me a lot of the open carry people. Both do have the right to do it, but both aren't prone to being very sensible with that applying right. And much like the open carry people, there is a lot of swaggering and showboating, and a far greater risk of issue because of it.

So I suppose my stance is, I see and agree with the concept, but I am weary as hell of the application of it and the harm it can cause.

It isn't hard to word, they just have to add " electronic communications" to existing laws that address snail mail. They already have laws that address this, they just need to be updated to include modern communications. I do not see the internet as "anonymous" though, rather I see it as very public, and permanent. I think it is peoples ignorance that makes them have a false sense of anonymity, because they should not be putting anything online they would not say to a judge since everything they do online is considered public and able to be used against them in a court of law. Their own ignorance of this really isn't an excuse for them to "think" it is private. No one ever told them it was.

That isn't what I meant by the issue with anonymous here though. I was referring to the lack of actually knowing who is on the other side of the computer with certainty, not with the people who think they are anonymous behind facebook posts, and how those who are so eager to play vigilante open the door for harming innocents due to their lack of dedication to properly vetting the people they accuse or stalk in pursuit of shaming. Open carry comparisons and all that.

As for the internet itself being public, not really sure how any of that relates to my initial point. Doesn't really make it less of a concern that would-be vigilantes being over zealous in their pursuit of punishing people.

I think it is the same thing though. regardless of if it is someone sending a dick pic via email or posting something online somewhere, it is still all the same in regards to anonymity. They are actually more anonymous, not less by sending it via snail mail, and yet they still caught many of the guys doing this stuff back then as well. Do we need to make sure the dick matches the perp? XD

You are afraid they would misplace blame? Someone else was using their account or spoofing? That is much more unlikely though in cases such as sending random dick pics.. I can see it as being likely in messing with friends and acquaintances, but not as much in regards to random strangers. I mean, yes I DID put an inflatable sheep in my friends bed with Ky jelly and a pink thong as a prank for when his date came over to his apartment for the first time.. but see that is different because it is with people you know.. I can't see why people would do that randomly to people they don't know, what would be the fun in that? Besides, you wouldn't even see their reaction.

While not impossible it would be done to mess with people, I was more relating to the various ways that make ID-ing hard to pinpoint online because of the nature of how those ID-ings are done. Yes, there is the more tech-savy methods of spoofing and proxy usage, but there is also the fact there are limits to how effective initial searches can be to track down someone online. How many times have users on the escapist itself been hit with permabans for sharing the same IP or other trigger as a banjumping account that have been later overturned? Hell, some dumb kid using his dad's phone instead of his own could create a mess as well. Or if an image that is used to ID someone is simply lifted from google or somewhere else and claimed to be their own by another person.

The problem is that the methods to detect and track people online are not foolproof to begin with and should require some good follow through before being seen as reliable proof to act upon anything. The sort of people who are acting the vigilante and eagerly rushing into shaming and punishing others are not the sort I trust to put any needed restraint to make sure they aren't swinging wide.

As I said from the start, the idea of shaming someone for their own stupidity is not one I object to, just the nature of how it is being accomplished here and the opportunity for more problems for more people this sort of vigilantism can cause.

Of course this is why I said it was much too much work for someone to do themselves and there should be a service offered for this. They could do the research required to determine whether or not they found the right person or not for them to prevent that type of action from taking place.

 

[runic knight]

The idea of shaming people for their own stupidity is one I can't really argue against in principle. If they flashing their junk at people who most likely want nothing to do with them or it, they are asking for a bit of mockery at the very least. That said, I do have to wonder about the practicality and the justness of how it is being done. On the one side, this seems to be baiting more dick pics from people either with no care of their family's opinions of them, or simply because they get off on that sort of thing. Or they may feel it a challenge and specifically rain dick pics or worse on them just because of the predictable reaction. On the other, I am not sure I like the self righteous vigilantism of it, especially given the ease of harm the would-be backlash can do to people who aren't actually involved. Steal a pic online, hack a phone or email, spoof an IP, lot of ways to mislead where things come from, or even intentional frame others for it. Considering this is presented through Jezebel, from, well, people I don't trust in any degree of personal responsibility, restraint, or even fair examination when it comes to their personal politics or ideology, I have a lot of doubts about the idea. Reminds me a little too much of the open carry nutters for comfort; both groups of people looking for an excuse to show off how much of a "good guy" they are by way of punishing others.

Not saying I think it is too common an occurrence at the moment, but change the dynamic of how people respond and watch people take advantage of that change. This would-be solution seems it will cause more issues and more serious issues to others. When you risk harming the lives of people just to counter a troll, I think the troll has well and truly won.

I think that will subside though when the laws catch up to include electronic communications. As it is, in most places it is illegal to send dick pics via snail mail, they just have not updated them to include modern communications in many places. It is happening slowly, and will get there in time, in the meantime this is one of the only options people have to combat it. If they do not want people to have to handle it themselves, they need to update the laws accordingly so people have someone they can call to have something done about it. We are just in this " in between stage" where it is running rampant because people have no recourse.

It is crazy though that this has gone on as long as it has without having laws updated more often... I am sure they do not want to look back on this time in internet history as "Era of Rampant Dicks", instead of people having shootouts over poker matches like the wild west they are fighting dick pics with dick pics..

Though if someone flashes someone in person, the person who was flashed has every right to tell their family what they did. They talk to news reporters, and the whole world finds out what they did , so I am not really seeing that as a problem here for them doing it online as well.

I agree, the law should be adjusted, sensibly, to have some means to deal with people sending unwanted stuff like that. Would probably be hard to word the language to not be weaponized though between ex's who have shared nudes or similar things. We've seen the lack of care about similar things on sites like facebook or youtube where the claim of nudity is enough to cause trouble for accounts, adding a legal repercussion to that instead of a commercial one would have to be done with care.

As for people having a right to inform others, that isn't the point of contention here. I think the problem is tied with the anonymity of it all and the ease to cause issues for people in a rush to play the hero vigilante. Like I said, it reminds me a lot of the open carry people. Both do have the right to do it, but both aren't prone to being very sensible with that applying right. And much like the open carry people, there is a lot of swaggering and showboating, and a far greater risk of issue because of it.

So I suppose my stance is, I see and agree with the concept, but I am weary as hell of the application of it and the harm it can cause.

It isn't hard to word, they just have to add " electronic communications" to existing laws that address snail mail. They already have laws that address this, they just need to be updated to include modern communications. I do not see the internet as "anonymous" though, rather I see it as very public, and permanent. I think it is peoples ignorance that makes them have a false sense of anonymity, because they should not be putting anything online they would not say to a judge since everything they do online is considered public and able to be used against them in a court of law. Their own ignorance of this really isn't an excuse for them to "think" it is private. No one ever told them it was.

That isn't what I meant by the issue with anonymous here though. I was referring to the lack of actually knowing who is on the other side of the computer with certainty, not with the people who think they are anonymous behind facebook posts, and how those who are so eager to play vigilante open the door for harming innocents due to their lack of dedication to properly vetting the people they accuse or stalk in pursuit of shaming. Open carry comparisons and all that.

As for the internet itself being public, not really sure how any of that relates to my initial point. Doesn't really make it less of a concern that would-be vigilantes being over zealous in their pursuit of punishing people.

I think it is the same thing though. regardless of if it is someone sending a dick pic via email or posting something online somewhere, it is still all the same in regards to anonymity. They are actually more anonymous, not less by sending it via snail mail, and yet they still caught many of the guys doing this stuff back then as well. Do we need to make sure the dick matches the perp? XD

You are afraid they would misplace blame? Someone else was using their account or spoofing? That is much more unlikely though in cases such as sending random dick pics.. I can see it as being likely in messing with friends and acquaintances, but not as much in regards to random strangers. I mean, yes I DID put an inflatable sheep in my friends bed with Ky jelly and a pink thong as a prank for when his date came over to his apartment for the first time.. but see that is different because it is with people you know.. I can't see why people would do that randomly to people they don't know, what would be the fun in that? Besides, you wouldn't even see their reaction.

While not impossible it would be done to mess with people, I was more relating to the various ways that make ID-ing hard to pinpoint online because of the nature of how those ID-ings are done. Yes, there is the more tech-savy methods of spoofing and proxy usage, but there is also the fact there are limits to how effective initial searches can be to track down someone online. How many times have users on the escapist itself been hit with permabans for sharing the same IP or other trigger as a banjumping account that have been later overturned? Hell, some dumb kid using his dad's phone instead of his own could create a mess as well. Or if an image that is used to ID someone is simply lifted from google or somewhere else and claimed to be their own by another person.

The problem is that the methods to detect and track people online are not foolproof to begin with and should require some good follow through before being seen as reliable proof to act upon anything. The sort of people who are acting the vigilante and eagerly rushing into shaming and punishing others are not the sort I trust to put any needed restraint to make sure they aren't swinging wide.

As I said from the start, the idea of shaming someone for their own stupidity is not one I object to, just the nature of how it is being accomplished here and the opportunity for more problems for more people this sort of vigilantism can cause.

Of course this is why I said it was much too much work for someone to do themselves and there should be a service offered for this. They could do the research required to determine whether or not they found the right person or not for them to prevent that type of action from taking place.

A for-hire vigilante group for shaming people? I get you probably refer to actual law enforcement, but now I am thinking of the a weird technological version of the A team and I rather like the concept. Either that or the "vigilante justice league".

 

[omega 616]

Come on, I watched a documentary on hand models, I shit you not.

So you're arguing that hand modeling is the same as every other kind of modeling?

Sorry, I forgot I was on the internet and generalizing about anything is like dropping a deuce on a neighbours lawn.

I don't know why people assume "he said this and never specified anything, so of course he must mean the worst thing".

What I am saying is "how hard can having your picture taken be?"

 

[OldNewNewOld]

I don't see the appeal of sending them randomly to stranger.
Although having a dating app on my phone, I get pictures without asking once every few days, some times more, sometimes less. But it's a site for dating and finding sex partners so it's kinda to be expected. Sending them to stranger on facebook, instagram or good old phone messages is wrong as fuck and I assume is punishable by law.

Spoiler

The only time I sent dick pictures was on a dating site when we agreed to share dick pictures before agreeing on a "date".

I believe it's a rather good way of dealing with them. Attacking them online or actually trying to reason with them is bound to fail. But this? I doubt that many of them have literally no contact with their parents, sisters or girlfriends if they have one. You can be indifferent to people sharing your sent picture online because of anonymity, but when it goes home and your mother gets to see it, shit just got real. Hell, not even your mother, just people around you. If you were embarrassed about those pictures, you wouldn't be sharing them around, so it's okay to just forward it to the people who know you.

 

[mecegirl]

I believe it's a rather good way of dealing with them. Attacking them online or actually trying to reason with them is bound to fail. But this? I doubt that many of them have literally no contact with their parents, sisters or girlfriends if they have one. You can be indifferent to people sharing your sent picture online because of anonymity, but when it goes home and your mother gets to see it, shit just got real. Hell, not even your mother, just people around you. If you were embarrassed about those pictures, you wouldn't be sharing them around, so it's okay to just forward it to the people who know you.

What it basically boils down to is getting caught. The reason why people wouldn't just whip it out in public is because they know the people around them would judge them for it. Sharing the gross shit they did with their friends and family members replicates that level of accountability. It's is why I don't get why people are so against "shaming". Yes some people can take things too far, but we all know that the only reason some people do shit over the internet is because they expect to not get caught. They'd never have the balls(had to do it..i just had too) to pull some of these stunts if the people they knew in real life knew what they were up too.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

I specifically said its not something all men do.

I honestly don't remember the part where I said otherwise. Looking back at my post, I get the impression that, rather than that, I was agreeing with you.

Sorry. I pretty wildly misinterpreted that. I can definitely tell looking back at it. I guess I'm just used to my posts in R&P being cause for grumbles usually haha.

 

[Something Amyss]

Sorry. I pretty wildly misinterpreted that. I can definitely tell looking back at it. I guess I'm just used to my posts in R&P being cause for grumbles usually haha.

Fair enough. I was more confused than anything, but I guess I was vague enough to read as something else.

 

[JimB]

Well, since criminal acts can widely vary, and what is deemed inappropriate is determined by the person/society, I could list a few that I know are illegal somewhere, that many people don't find inappropriate.

Sodomy
same sex relationships
gambling
public intoxication
recreational drug use

Oh yeah. I honestly forgot those were crimes. But doesn't this just create the question of who gets to decide what's appropriate?

Sorry, I forgot I was on the internet and generalizing about anything is like dropping a deuce on a neighbor's lawn.

Look, if you don't want to answer any of the questions I've asked of you, then that's fine, but please do not pretend that being expected to back up the statements you made is somehow unfairly martyring you.

 

[Something Amyss]

.. That sounds like a waste of time. Sure the person sending such a picture is open for punishment if their wife / family / friends found out, but why would you go to such lengths to humiliate them? Granted, I get her reason so people harass her less, but that's the thing. Isn't she giving them attention by purposely seeking them out? If she simply ignored and deleted the pics, no one could muster the determination patience to keep harassing her after some time.

If they do, and it gets personal- just block their number. Or call the police ... something like that. Not sure if what she's doing is either right or wrong, but man that's such a waste of time. You could be doing far more productive or efficient to your life, that'll actually help you out in the long run.

Did you read the article?

She says the number of pics she's gotten has gone down because of this. The opposite of what you're saying.

 

[omega 616]

Well, since criminal acts can widely vary, and what is deemed inappropriate is determined by the person/society, I could list a few that I know are illegal somewhere, that many people don't find inappropriate.

Sodomy
same sex relationships
gambling
public intoxication
recreational drug use

Oh yeah. I honestly forgot those were crimes. But doesn't this just create the question of who gets to decide what's appropriate?

Sorry, I forgot I was on the internet and generalizing about anything is like dropping a deuce on a neighbor's lawn.

Look, if you don't want to answer any of the questions I've asked of you, then that's fine, but please do not pretend that being expected to back up the statements you made is somehow unfairly martyring you.

Not pretending anything, I just think it's pretty obvious what I actually meant.

Ok, I did say it very generally but it's so fucking boring to literally reiterate your point in just about every possible way, only for somebody to find a way of still getting the wrong end of the stick or just blatantly ignoring part of the post to suit their argument.

You watch opinion youtubers do it, reviewtechusa for example, they state an opinion, have to "give a bit" so people know they aren't being an asshole "PSN did this shitty thing, don't get me wrong I like PSN overall, I even have every PS console but this thing is shitty" and then someone will always say "god, you always go on about hating PSN! You're such a xbox/nintendo fanboy! kill yourself in a fire!" (why is it always in a fire?).

So, I am not going to expand upon my original post and venture into this rabbit hole, where I have to be super nit picky about what I have to say, only for you to pick at one loose thread and harp on it 'cos lets be honest, in a weeks time you wont even remember this conversation and if you do, I hope for your sake you have an eidetic memory.

 

[happyninja42]

Well, since criminal acts can widely vary, and what is deemed inappropriate is determined by the person/society, I could list a few that I know are illegal somewhere, that many people don't find inappropriate.

Sodomy
same sex relationships
gambling
public intoxication
recreational drug use

Oh yeah. I honestly forgot those were crimes. But doesn't this just create the question of who gets to decide what's appropriate?

Yes, yes it does. And that's where open discussion comes in. Deciding what is appropriate, is done by the public. Through debate, literature, vlogs, threads like this. They shape and mold what we consider "right and wrong" as time, and our understanding of morality and reality change. Then the laws have to try and catch up. If we're lucky, the laws will be put in place quickly, and they will be good laws, that provide the most benefit and quality of life to the society. If we're unlucky, they will work against the benefit and quality of life of the society, or at the very least not protect it. For example, not having laws regarding dick pics, when there are laws for doing essentially the same thing, but in person (flashing someone). There are tons of other examples of where our laws and our moral compass don't match up, either due to that morality changing, and the laws still being based on old concepts (usually called Blue Laws in the USA). And we have to constantly work to try and shape the laws to be the most beneficial, and the least detrimental. And that's done by making sure our duly appointed representatives, know our minds on the various subjects. Because they're basically our mouthpieces. You will very rarely ever find a politician (or at least a successful one with a long career), who doesn't simply voice the opinions of his constituents.

Some of it is also generational. Simply letting the previous generation, with their outdated modes of thinking die off, can help to move things forward. But for the people being effected now, that's not soon enough.

 

[rednose1]

My only request is to retire the term "dic pic". So over-used. Start calling them "meat tweets".

 

[JimB]

Not pretending anything, I just think it's pretty obvious what I actually meant.

So do I, honestly, but I think what you actually mean is something you're trying very hard to avoid saying in order to not draw heat for it.

I am not going to expand upon my original post and venture into this rabbit hole.

Got it. Models are whores because you watched a documentary on hand models, then.

In a week's time you wont even remember this conversation and if you do, I hope for your sake you have an eidetic memory.

Thank you for the sincerity of your concern.

 

[omega 616]

Not pretending anything, I just think it's pretty obvious what I actually meant.

So do I, honestly, but I think what you actually mean is something you're trying very hard to avoid saying in order to not draw heat for it.

I am not going to expand upon my original post and venture into this rabbit hole.

Got it. Models are whores because you watched a documentary on hand models, then.

In a week's time you wont even remember this conversation and if you do, I hope for your sake you have an eidetic memory.

Thank you for the sincerity of your concern.

Why do I need to say anything? Apparently you know exactly what I mean "I think what you actually mean is something you're trying very hard to avoid saying .... Models are whores".

Yes, that is exactly what I meant ... especially, as somebody else brought up, the child models.

Though I appreciate you proving my point about people just pulling on the worst thread or making the worst assumption or just ignoring parts of the post to prove your own argument.

 

[JimB]

Why do I need to say anything?

Since you're the one who keeps talking to me to tell me you won't talk to me or you don't need to talk to me, I guess you need to say something in order to feel like you're winning a fight, either against me as your specific enemy or against public perception of your arguments.