Two State Bills Could Curtail Your Civil Liberties When It Comes To Social Media: Chicagoist
One measure, introduced by State Sen. John G. Mulroe (D-Chicago), would require minors charged with crimes to turn over the keys to all of their social media accounts to the courts and the cops, and bar them from using them for a yet-to-be-determined amount of time.
“Our world is changing, and social media is a big part of it. We’re just trying to address this as we go, to discourage its abuse,” Mulroe told the Chicago Tribune. “I’m offering this up for a conversation.”
But Mulroe is doing more than simply offering the thought up for conversation, telling the Tribune that free speech should be limited. “You don’t have a First Amendment right to just say whatever you want. It has to be within reason. You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater,” added Mulroe.
From: Two State Bills Could Curtail Your Civil Liberties When It Comes To Social Media: Chicagoist
Gee, I seem to have forgotten my email address and password Judge.
““You don’t have a First Amendment right to just say whatever you want. It has to be within reason. You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater,” added Mulroe.”
This crap again?Report
I propose a “Holmes Corollary” to Godwin’s Law – anyone who quotes “‘fire’ in a crowded theater” is instantly recognized by all parties to have lost the argument, which can then safely be ended.Report
Seconded, all in favor of the motion, say “FIRE!!!!”Report
And then say “AIM!!!”.Report
Yeah, the measure he’s arguing for isn’t equivalent to not being allowed to say “fire” in a crowded theatre. It’s more like saying that, once you’ve committed any crime – regardless of the crime – you’re no longer allowed to go into a threatre. The punishment doesn’t logically follow the crime.
If it’s a specific crime where the punishment is relevant – for example, serious online harassment – then I can see the argument for a temporary ban. But there’s no logical connection between, say, “shoplifting,” and “no longer allowed to use Facebook”.Report
It would be as dumb as taking away a driver’s license for an infraction that has nothing to do with driving. Wait, we do that to teens too. Some people seem to think that the second word of “in loco parentis” is Spanish rather than Latin.Report
@katherinemw
To be fair, the original use of that phrase was a similarly poor analogy.Report
and the Judge will send you to jail on an indefinite contempt charge until your memory comes back.Report
Headline news: Man dies of old age in jail for forgetting his password.Report
I was thinking the same thing. Sure, you could be pretending to have forgotten, but people REALLY forget their passwords all the time, even when not under the stress of a criminal investigation.Report
Headline Correction: Child brutally raped & beaten in jail for forgetting Facebook password.Report
“Totes got raped in jail. ZOMG! @judgesmalls is a total ass! #morelikeworstamendment”Report
@kazzy You know what I don’t find funny? People joking about kids getting raped.
(Oscar, I don’t think, was joking. Or if he was, it was gallows humor from despair at the system. Maybe that’s what you were doing too, if so I apologize for mishearing you.)Report
Gallows humor is pretty accurate. My thoughts on the eagerness of the justice system to jail people should be more than clear by now.Report
@oscar-gordon Yeah, that’s how I read you and fwiw it didn’t bother me.Report
I don’t know that I have much of a defense, @maribou . My intention was not to make light of child rape but to highlight the sort of absurd outcome that may arise from bullshit laws like this. That said, if I swung and missed — and Lord knows I’ve swung and missed many times before — I’m not sure what to do other than put my tail between my legs, admit my error, and thank you for helping me understand how my comment landed with people outside the space between my ears.
So, yea, in hindsight, this was probably something I shouldn’t have said. I’m not one for revising history and hiding my sins. At the same time, leaving up a joke that risks offending others seems to double down on the initial thoughtlessness. Should I take it down? I ask this genuinely…Report
Leave it up. The commentariat is invited to revise the joke as they so wish.
Humor is one of those things that often fails, particularly when folks are learning how to do it right.
Apologize, and try to do better in the future — it’s all you can do.
This from someone who listens to jokes about the Holocaust, mind.Report
No, I would very much prefer the commentariat NOT feel invited to revise the joke as they so wish. If people want to practice their jokes-in-the-voice-of-a-rape-vicitim, there are plenty of less-civil forums to do that in.Report
@kazzy You did swing and miss, at least to my ears. Because the voice you were adopting was that of the abused person, and it’s very very risky to try and make jokes that involve pretending to be an abused kid.
As for the other, speaking as a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, I come across child rape jokes way more often than I would like (the period after the puppeteer for Elmo was revealed as an abuser was particularly difficult). And I very rarely see anyone called out for it, let alone explain what they meant to be doing and acknowledge that they were hurtful.
So I vote we leave it up. I would have been surprised and pleased to see this exchange between other people, back when I was more fragile than I am now.
And, I’m not like, super-mad at you or something, though it did make me unhappy.
I just figured you of all people would rather be told such a thing than ignored.Report
“I just figured you of all people would rather be told such a thing than ignored.”
Concur. Leave it up. While I read it as gallows humor, not everyone on this site is an aging pessimist with a dark sense of humor. 🙂Report
FWIW, I read it as gallows humor as well; it’s highlighting the absurd differential between the trivial offense (social media crimes) and its potential draconian punishment (a minor, who possibly barely understands the legal system that put them there, being raped in jail). It does this in part by referring to a horrific situation (rape) via trivial language (hashtags/Twitterspeak).
I no more think Kazzy was attempting to make light of child rape than I think anyone around here would, and I think the joke does exactly what it set out to do; make a point, while laughing grimly at the dark absurdity of it.
But the other forum I spend my online time in, while still civil, has a broader latitude on dark/edgy jokes; so maybe I’m the wrong person to ask.Report
@glyph I don’t think it was a horrible thing that he made the joke, to be clear, even if I think it falls flat (and even though I think most jokes done in that style are likely to do more harm than good); I just think it would be a pretty horrible thing if I didn’t feel like I could tell him I didn’t think it was funny, and why.Report
Humor is obviously subjective, but I’m still not clear as to why the fact that it’s done in the (imaginary) victim’s “voice” that causes the problem?
When I deconstruct the joke (which, full disclosure, made me laugh; both the “ZOMG!” and “worstamendment” hashtag bits tickled me), I think there’s a real economy and elegance to the joke.
What is the joke about? Social media use incongruously landing a teen in jail, a horrible place where they might have additional crimes committed against them.
How best to quickly get that across? Why, social media – a fake Tweet.
Who BUT the imaginary teenage “victim” could “send” the fake Tweet? Certainly not the prison rapist, nor the judge that put the teen in jail – that wouldn’t be funny at all. They are the bad guys in this micro-story, and as empathetic humans we want to hear from the underdog.
Now, if the position is that you just didn’t find the joke funny, there’s no arguing that. Humor is subjective, after all.
If the position is that the topic is so serious it should never (or only rarely) be joked about, I can at least see that position; I mostly disagree with it pretty strongly, but I understand it.
But if the position is that the people who in real life are the victims can never (or only rarely) be notionally-represented within a joke as the putative “voice” of the joke without disrespecting or hurting the feelings of real-life victims – that, I don’t get.
If the joke itself is worth telling (and I think it is, within certain social parameters; that is, a gathering of child rape victims would probably be a bad spot for it), then it should be told using whichever in-joke “protagonist” the joke itself requires; and as I note above, I don’t see how anyone else BUT the (imaginary) victim could possibly be the “protagonist” of this particular joke.
(I suspect that I am probably missing your point, for which I pre-emptively apologize. I just find the purposes and mechanics of humor, as well as its limits in various social settings, pretty fascinating).Report
@glyph is giving me more credit here than I deserve, methinks.Report
That brings up an interesting point, actually. If that joke really hits all the notes… but largely unbeknownst to the teller… does that “count”? I mean, it is possible that all of that was working on a subconscious level. But it is also possible that I was being an ass and that intelligent people can justify stuff after the fact.
This is a more general question than one specific to this issue.Report
@kazzy – Oh, I don’t think you sat down and thought all this through ahead of time; jokes work via a lot of intuitive connections (and missed connections), and overthinking them usually kills them dead. But I think that the joke does work (or at least, it worked for me) and I am explaining why and how.
I’ve been pretty firm in the past that jokes don’t HAVE to have a point to be funny (most of my favorites tend towards pointless absurdism), but to me this joke clearly did have a point, AND was funny (darkly so, but still). Edgy, to be sure, since “I got raped” is inherently a shocking thing to say; but like I said, I find the mechanics interesting.Report
I think where the joke fell flat — and where Maribou’s objection (and my initial but fleeting hesitation) stands — is the implication that rape isn’t a big deal. Donning the voice of a teenager and complaining about rape the way one would complain about homework or a pimple or a watery slushy risks the impression that the joke-teller considers all of those to be of more or less equal dread.
That isn’t the ONLY way to read the joke but it is certainly present enough within the joke that someone very easily and understandably could read that into it. So I appreciate Maribou giving voice to those who might in fact read it that way, allowing me an opportunity to both apologize and clarify.Report
That’s interesting, since it suggests a “weighting” to the joke’s multiple elements or interpretations.
But I think if you thought rape wasn’t a big deal, you wouldn’t have made the joke (since as I said, the joke juxtaposes big deals against little deals per the subject at hand, and without the big deal, there is no joke).Report
Can you explain the “weighting”?
And I think @maribou said her objection was at least partially rooted in communicating with other victims, folks who might not know me/us well enough to give me/us the benefit of the doubt.Report
@kazzy
Glyph is right, it’s the juxtaposition that hits. Who thinks rape is a big deal? People who have been raped, and the people close to them. Who might take an un-serious view toward prison rape? Prison guards, prosecutors, judges, elected officials, citizens who place “Law & Order” as paramount; who all enable it in some way because disobedience of the law is sufficient justification for all manner of jail house horrors.
They are the imaginary audience of the joke, the people for whom the tone & hashtags of you faux-tweet meet all their expectations of ill-behaved youth.Report
No, he’s deconstructing your work. Kick back, have a drink, enjoy the effort.
PS The hashtags made me laugh as well, but gallows humor is a pretty reliable mode for me.Report
You all get how soldiers who have served in combat often react quite negatively to smug bullshit from people who have not? Why is this?
The thing about “gallows humor” is this: it is for those who face the gallows. It is for the hangman who day in day out hears the snap of the neck, or the ER worker, who has to find some psychological tool to deal with those who die within their hands. It is for the soldier in war.
Compared with, the relatively comfortable middle-class person who has not faced anything nearly so terrible?
They have free speech. But so do I. They can say their jokes. I can say their jokes were in horrible taste. Round and round it goes.
If I puff out my chest and say dumb things about combat, in a room with a combat veteran, they might do many things. They might quietly hate me and withdraw. They might confront me. They might whisper to friends to shut me up. On and on. In any case, I’m being kind of a pretentious ninny.
I have never seen someone’s belly rip open and spill its contents. I can joke about it. But I don’t get to call it “gallows humor.” Instead, it’s just me being an ass. So it goes with rape.Report
You assume your conclusion right away, with the term “smug bullshit”. What I am trying to determine is whether or not said joke was “smug bullshit”.
I have clearly laid out why I think Kazzy was neither smug, nor bullshitting (that is, the point of his joke was that the rape of a teen for the “crime” of a Tweet, would be one of the cruelest “jokes” this cruel universe has yet come up with).
Humor is one way humans cope with a cruel and uncaring universe. From a humor perspective, ALL of us face the cosmic gallows. Many stories and jokes lament various injustices I may be lucky enough to never face personally, but I could, and my fellow (wo)man may. And in this they teach empathy.
I’m not saying never call out an ass; I’m saying make sure someone’s being an ass before you call them out.Report
@glyph — I didn’t accuse @kazzy of “smug bullshit,” which is why I used the example of combat veterans, which I chose to be sufficiently different from this situation. I am instead responding to the notion that “gallows humor” is an adequate dodge. I suggest that, in general, it is not. Those who work day to day by the gallows get to use gallows humor. Those who do not, well, they do not.
Furthermore, gallows humor works best among those with a shared understanding. A rape survivor talking to other rape survivors might use gallows humor, about their shared, ongoing experiences. I know among trans women, we often make very biting jokes about our lives. However, I cannot meaningfully share those jokes with you. You don’t have the frame, therefore you won’t feel their impact.
Rape jokes made in public have none of these features. “Gallows humor” does not work as an excuse.Report
We’ll have to agree to disagree. Joking about things that we find horrific, even if we are unlikely to face them personally, is IMO an existential coping mechanism. As long as we are not doing it with the intent to hurt people (or a wanton disregard for hurting people, which would be if I walked into a rape victims’ group and made the joke – a place where I could reasonably foresee a much different audience interpretation), then the joke should be taken on its own terms. And as I said, to me this joke expresses a valid point, in a darkly-humorous way.
(And my argument is not intended to apply to ALL “rape jokes”; my argument is about THIS joke, which includes prison rape as part of the subject matter it is referencing.)
I don’t hold up “dead baby” shock jokes as the height of comedy; nor would I recommend telling them to bereaved parents.
But I would also never say that ONLY bereaved parents can tell those jokes.
And the deep dark heart of those jokes – as in almost ALL jokes, at root – is that the universe doesn’t care, horrible things happen to us, and then we die. We can scream and go mad, or we can laugh.
Comedy is weird.Report
@glyph — Anyone can tell any joke they want. Anyone can decide that a joke was in bad taste and reflects poorly on those who told it.
Anyone can tell dead baby jokes. If I go around doing that, people might decide I’m a childish dipshit with poor social calibration. They might furthermore decide that they don’t want to invite me to their dinner party.
Say I’m on a first date. It is entirely legal for me to, during the date, make rape jokes. I can do that. It is legal. However, my date might grab the breadsticks and run.
I am free, but so is she.
I might said to my friends, “But it was gallows humor…”
I might later say to my friends, “But why can’t I get a girlfriend…?”
To this, what should my friends say to me?
People on this forum can make the jokes they choose. Others can decide if this is the kind of place they where they want to spend time.
After all, this forum could be 4chan, if the collective culture bent that way. Or it could chose otherwise. How else do we shape the culture but by talking about it?
My point, make all the rape jokes you want, but don’t be surprised if the forum degrades.Report
The fun part about dead baby jokes is the censors finally writing back (one assumes in blood, to make it stick) to the Simpsons, NO MORE DEAD BABY JOKES.Report
What’s really scary is watching some people deal with what they’ve been through.
Honestly, I’d rather read about some grisly gallows humor than watch someone painstakingly draw real-to-life pictures of someone being sliced open by a knife (person dealing with ritualized murder), and to have that openly displayed in a sexualized context.Report
@kim — Right now I’m reading I’ve Got a Time Bomb, which includes a rather graphic account of when the author had her skull split wide by two “gay bashing” creeps with a big pipe. Afterward she lay in a ditch for a couple days, unable to move. She could touch the soft tissue beneath her skull. Needless to say, she emerged with pretty severe brain damage, but implausible alive all the same.
The thing is, I knew the book contained this. I knew her writing style. But still, you’re just reading along, maybe one third in, and bam it just comes. So yeah, it was intensely difficult to read.
You can like what you like, but when I encounter internet “edgelords” who want to endlessly joke about torture, rape, and dismemberment — but they have experienced none of those thing, nor are they likely to — well it is not gallows humor. It is something else. You can like it. You can hate it. We all have the freedom to speak up. But no one should pretend their nice safe life is anything but.
This is not gallows humor.Report
Truth indeed — and hard won from the sound of it.
It’s not like I mind nightmarish descriptions, per se.
It’s the active sexualizing of ritualized murder that’s disturbing.Report
@veronica-d
FWIW, the combat veterans I’ve known, when I’ve said dumb things about combat, were pretty kind about it, while still being honest with me. They certainly didn’t make me feel pretentious, like a ninny, or like an ass (though I might’ve felt that way on my own). Because we cared about each other and they wanted me to learn, and they were also willing to imagine that the stupid thing they thought I said might have had an insightful (or even merely careless) intention behind it, or that I didn’t mean what they thought I meant.
I try to remember that when I get frustrated about other people’s take on things I’m assuming they don’t know about from personal experience nearly as well as I do (not that my experiences are the same as prison rape, for that matter – but I doubt that most people here have experienced both being beaten and being sexually violated as a child). Especially when those people are valuable to me both as members of a community and as individuals.
I think you are amazing and wonderful, but sometimes I really wish you were less quick to throw out insults – even by analogy – to online people I care about – just as I care about you.
And now I think that sentence sounds terribly treacly and condescending and I really don’t mean to be. But sometimes I would just really like to explore my differences with some of the folks here without escalating them. (Even if I start out pretty grumpy and have to descalate *myself*.) If being able to do that comes at the cost of YOU not being around, well, I really don’t want that. I’d rather you were around and I felt stymied / sidelined from time to time, and you may have your own reasons for needing to speak out without undue self-censorship on this topic.Report
@maribou — I honestly didn’t intend any insult to @kazzy — which I can say, when I intend to insult someone on this forum, I do so directly without ambiguity. I’ve done this often enough, I think, that this will be believed. In any case, he made a tasteless and hurtful joke. It happens. It is easy to forgive.
That is not my objection. Instead, my objection is how people double down on this stuff, how others (@glyph) pop into the conversation and bring up bogus non-issues, such as how “gallows humor” was brought up here. That is nonsense, and quite dismissive of real experience.
And let’s face it, this is so often gendered. It is this: men very often have a different comfort zone from women, and while I suppose compromise is possible, it never quite feels like we’re meeting halfway. It seems as if so many social spaces are constructed according to the comfort of men. (#notallmen, #notjustmen, #sometimessomewomen, etc. But the point is, while things are seldom absolutely gendered, they are gendered all the same.)
Anyway, it’s the dog and the lizard. Dammit it’s cold in here.
I am not surprised that your friends who are veterans were patient with you. However, I bet you did not double down when they complained. I bet you didn’t -splain to them why they were wrong to object, nor why it was socially necessary for you to say whatever the hell you wanted without concern for their feelings.
I often use combat veterans as an example in this conversation. My intuition is, simply, that a lot of men who could not possibly relate to Thelma and Louise are quite fond of Rambo. In other words, they respond to Mangst, but seldom a woman’s concerns. Likewise, I think a lot of men have an aversion to the “wannabe badass” type, the “edgy” guy who wants the mystique of a real soldier, but who never served.
I am hoping that, when they compare the actual veteran, versus the loudmouth ninny-boy, they can get a glimpse of how habitual-rape-joke-guy sounds to women, along with the inevitable rape-joke-apologist.
Maybe. I haven’t found a better way to get through to them. In any case, to work, “gallows humor” requires a shared understanding, often around a shared trauma. If someone lacks those things, their attempt at “gallows humor” will come across like the 14-year-old suburban metalhead ranting about Cannibal Corpse to anyone who will listen. It is to lack the insight to even understand that they lack insight.
We might be patient with the 14 year-old. He’s a kid. But on a forum dominated by grown men? We should expect better.Report
@veronica-d
Yeah, I’ve read that parable before and I like it sometimes, though other times, I don’t know why the lizard (putting myself in the place of the lizard) wouldn’t at least TRY saying “how would you like it if I brought some heaters in here and toasted you until you were about to melt?” (granted it quite possibly wouldn’t work, since I can picture the dog saying, “that’s completely different!”), and I also don’t like how stark the contrasts are. I really get frustrated by analogies that exaggerate rather than acknowledge the gender-binary considering how sick I am of feeling like a fox running around being told by a wolves that I’m a lizard. When my fellow (or at least fellow-enough-for-the-sake-of-this-analogy) foxes start explaining that we’re all lizards, to make the most vivid possible illustration, I get frustrated. Because I am Just Not That Different, dang it. It’s the latent biological sciences geek in me. And probably if I were further along the spectrum toward “woman” instead of hanging out at the 65-75 percent mark, it would bug me less? Except that I have cis and trans female friends who also have complained about being over-binarized. Still, I take your point.
But but but:
You remember I was the first one to bring up gallows humor, right? He was using my terms, not distracting from them by haring off – he was comparing the joke I was fine with to the joke I didn’t like.
You’re entitled to your own perception of what happened.
But I know a lot of people with a lot of abstraction in their brains (let’s just shortcut that to “coders”, shall we, even though plenty of them are not literally coders? you know a lot of them too, I know), and I ALSO know that Glyph has been fascinated with why things are or aren’t funny to different people for just about as long as I’ve known him (years now), and I don’t THINK he was splaining, I just felt like he was and recognized that meant I needed to take a breath, because with anything that touches on that particular topic, any time people start explaining things that can be interpreted *at all* as telling me how I SHOULD think or I SHOULD feel, part of me wants to start breaking all the things.
So, like, right now I know you are not splaining to me. But it feels that way. And I know you are not “doubling down,” but it kinda feels that way too.
*breathes*
One of the things I love about this community is that, in general, we can presume each other’s good will. There are commenters who NEVER do that (I generally try to ignore them), and all of us have people with whom we generally can’t presume good will, nor them for us. Such is the way of things . But in general, I think, we TRY. And a lot of really valuable friendships and acquaintances have grown out of that trying for me. A lot of times I feel like you either aren’t willing to extend that presumption to most people on here – that there’s usually an “us” and a “them” and while I am part of your “us” (ish?) – and I appreciate that – many of your “them” are ALSO part of my “us” (which is, of course, allowed! it just leaves me feeling uncomfortable). or else I just can’t read you correctly and posts that you mean affably sound antagonistic to me. equally possible.
Anyway, I probably should have said this long ago, but when I engage in this way, it’s just as me, not as An Editor or anything. I’m not trying to moderate the board. Just .. splain the people I care about to each other, I guess. I should know better than that by now, but it’s hard to manage when one’s cat is dying by unpreventable inches and one is operating on 3 hours of sleep a night during a crisis period at one’s job. *shrugs*Report
Well, it hurt my feelings (briefly, and I moved on, as noted, but I know what it would’ve done befre) and I didn’t think it was funny. (And as you know explaining jokes might mitigate perceived intentions but it rarely makes them funny.) I’ve had occasion to talk to other survivors about other jokes that seem similar to me, and I’ve never heard of them finding it funny.
As for “a gathering of child rape survivors” I think that might be the only context in which I MIGHT find it funny because then it is people making fun of experiences they have come close to themselves, rather than experiences which they see completely from the outside. In such a gathering I would assume the person making the joke was processing their own crap, and funniness would – not consciously but subconsciouly – be a form of supporting them.
This isn’t a “gathering of child rape survivors”, but it is a thread which it is reasonable to assume at least two survivors of child sexual abuse will be reading, given that at least 2 of us have recently disclosed / redisclosed that information on lo, this very website in a heated multi-thread discussion.
In this particular case, abut which I will then be REALLY done talking because it’s a lot more stressful to talk about how it actually IS funny and I just don’t get it than it was to interact with Kazzy about it…
I guess the way the voice of the victim came across struck me as not kind to the victim. It made the victim sound vapid. I work with people under 25 and over 15 all day and it sounds like a catty stereotype of one, not an informed supportive parody that would inform the joke you read.Report
Fair enough. Not trying to upset anybody, just explaining my reaction and thought processes. At the end of the day, it’s either funny to you and me or it’s not, and that’s going to be determined in large part by individual worldview and history. Take care.Report
@glyph I wasn’t trying to make you feel bad, either – I thought you wanted to know why I didn’t think it was funny, and I was doing my best to answer that while warning you that I was feeling pretty worn out. I didn’t mean (and didn’t think you would think I meant) that I literally thought you were accusing me of being Wrong And Bad to think it wasn’t funny, just trying to convey my state of mind at the time.
I am pretty much never trying to hit anybody over the head with “I AM A SURVIVOR AND YOU SHOULDN’T SAY THAT” (well, I mean, except people being super-nasty on purpose, which no one here was doing). Sometimes I fail at that. It’s hard stuff. It’s hard to feel like someone doesn’t empathize with you or people in positions that feel similar to you, even when your better instincts say otherwise. But if I was really really upset, I wouldn’t even talk about it? I managed that for decades, you know? A lot of the time I managed not to think about it, even, in that weird, “I know these things happened but I refuse to consider what they mean or give them any space in my head even when they are totally fucking up my day / week/ life.”
TBH, I winced uncomfortably at the joke when I first saw it, didn’t laugh (though I’d laughed at Oscar’s), and if it had been anyone other than @kazzy I wouldn’t have said anything. Not worth my energies, not particularly helpful to them. But @kazzy has often called people out on this site, when he rightly or wrongly thought they were making a mistake in how they talked about something, and he’s actively expressed before that he wants people to do the same for him. So, *because* I know him (in the online sense at least), I responded differently than I would’ve responded to someone else – just about anyone else – making the same comment. I wouldn’t go to the A/V club, pick some random person, and assume they want to know if my sense of humor corresponds with theirs and if they’ve hurt my feelings…
Sorry if this is too much emotional information, I just feel like you’re not hearing what I’m saying – not “random person saying it”, but me, Maribou. And probably you would be justified in feeling the same way.Report
I hear you.Report
@maribou
Well, sure, I said that… but I didn’t really mean it. :-p
Just kidding. Again, I appreciate the respectful way you brought your feelings to my attention, Maribou. Thanks.Report
@kazzy Ha! See, now, THAT was funny ;).Report
I appreciate you bringing it up, @maribou and in a manner that will allow me to grow from this experience. I’ll leave it up unless it seems to create greater problems.
I’ll confess that I did have a moment’s pause before clicking “Post” and should have given greater attention to this. Thoughtless and sloppy, to say the least, on my part.Report
I think the response is a better joke than the initial joke.Report
I don’t get it. Why would they want to stop people dumb enough to post evidence of their crimes on social media from using social media?Report
They don’t. Those people are just to excuse to claim the power.Report