What makes you think the OP isn’t working through this in a rational manner? She’s met with school officials and had a frank discussion with her son.
I guess that media reporting it is probably the main cause of the dead threats and such. Whether they should have reported it or not is another issue entirely.
The reddit thread is particularly interesting because a number of parents and students at this school are posting there.
I was speaking to the tone of the responses.
The comments by users louis45vn and Orionpeace are what make me think it shouldn’t have been reported as it was.
Today my son learned that one kid on the list is a person with whom he has had run-ins in the past. This boy wears a MAGA hat and is considered sexist and a bigot by many. His big goal in life is to join the Israeli army and own a lot of guns and use them.
This child, age 14, was identified as that “Twerpy big mouthed ginger Jewish kid.” I am not sure if his name was attatched or not.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
Interesting. Does that kid himself know he’s on that list, and if so, what does he think about it?
The kid knowa henisnon the list and was at the information/ counselling session my son was at. Theybwere buddiesnin grade 7, last year had a.falling out over poltics and beliefs and today…they sat together at the session.
I don’t know much more. I got home at 530 and saw my son for the 15 mins I drove him to his 6pm activity. Between “hi how are you?’ And “Did you empty your lunch kit?” I got the news that the *ginger kid” was on the list.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
And…I type terribly on my phone
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
Go reread that article.
It quotes another student as saying that. Which means shit. The student is just making a wild ass guess.
The students who made this may learn a very valuable lesson that the rules have changed in society. What you put online goes out of your control, even if you don’t make it public.
It’s not acceptable to be using homophobic slurs to refer to people you just don’t like.
People want them variously to not be able to join university, to be severely punished, to have to pay huge fines. Supposedly rational adults call them “monsters”, probably dozens of thousands of “adults” are clamoring online that they’re horrible people, and there’s a huge risk that their identity will eventually be disclosed, and that they’ll never see an end to this. You call that a “valuable lesson”? I call that a witch hunt against a couple children. It’s for their safety and mental health that you should be worried.
And I assume, that during your whole life, you never wrote anything untoward, including privately, you never said anything untoward, including when you were a kid, you never did anything untoward, that could have hurt someone if it was disclosed or repeated? You and all the posters who want these two children to suffer for using the word “fag” privately are perfection incarnated? Are you all without sin who are so eager to cast stones?
And you all pretend to be worried about “bullying” and “harassment” and “safety of children” while participating in arousing anger online against two kids?
I have no idea where you got all this. My point was that no one should expect to have privacy anywhere on the internet. Darren Garrison mentioned celebrity pics. I thought the same thing then. It was sad that they thought they’d remain private, but it was naive.
My posts here are public and I certainly can’t control who does what with them. But the list those kids made was not public. They thought it was private. They were mistaken.
I suggest that everyone should verify the age of a poster before bashing him/her in the pit. Lest they be accused of bullying children.
Yes, but there is a difference between saying that you should never say anything in a public forum and expect it to be private and saying to never say anything sensitive in a medium you expect to be private because someone might steal that data from you.
If you blurt something out in public, any harm done is your fault. If you whisper it in private and someone–unbeknownst* to you–has been recording you through your window with a parabolic microphone and then releases it, the harm is on them. People have the right to trash-talk other people in private. (I’m willing to grant a bit of a concession to the case of politicians and other cases of people in the position of making policies over people’s lives–their dirty laundry probably needs airing.)
*Hey, I think this the first time I’ve ever actually used that word!
Something very important is missing from this discussion: how the original Google Doc was set up in the first place. For those unfamiliar with Google Docs, when creating a Google Doc, you have one of three options:
• view/edit publicly–that is, anyone on the Internet can view or view/edit it
• only people in a specific group (such as your contacts) can view/edit;
• only the creator can view/edit (Private).
“Private” is the default setting. Someone who’s been given permission to view the Doc can’t share it without the express permission of the creator(s). Control lies strictly with the Doc creator–unless, of course, the creator of the Doc set permissions to Public. And those who have permission to view do not have permission to edit unless the creator sets it up that way.
So this is NOTHING like an overheard conversation or a stolen diary. The creator of the Doc had control the entire time.
From one of the news articles:
So (assuming that is accurate) it is pretty much exactly like a stolen diary.
I wrote :
And you answered :
So, you make them responsible of the death threats because they wrote a list, someone else disclosed it and yet another person reacted by sending death threats.
That’s where I got all this.
And I asked you if you would feel responsible too if someone disclosed your private communications, and someone else, reading them or hearing them, reacted by doing something nefarious. It’s a straightforward enough question, given your statement
If you had only said that, I would have had no issue with your post, but you didn’t. You clearly implied that they bear responsibility for the death threats. So again, are you responsible yourself for everything that can result from someone reading your messages or overhearing what you say, even indirectly, and even if these communications were private? Are you responsible for instance if someone torches the kid’s house in retaliation because someone else told him that some woman on the internet (you) thinks that they’re responsible for the death threats, he thinks that you have a point, and decides that the kids must pay for it? And are you still responsible if you hadn’t even written this here, but in a private message to your SO?
Or will you agree that these kids had no responsibility for the death threats, and that they harassed nobody and abused nobody?
How were the kids mistaken that it was private? I thought the file was published by another student against their wishes?
I think the student who breached their privacy should be held to account for it.
No, I won’t agree to that, clairobscur. You’re wrong in what I supposedly “implied”. I didn’t imply they were responsible for someone else making death threats. I didn’t even come close. Their mistake was in thinking something “private” was not. They’re not blameless in this situation, and there should be consequences. Not life-altering consequences like not being able to attend college, but something.
Bolding mine. That’s the mistake-assuming something on the internet is private.
IIRC, the document was on the cloud, which may not be really considered the Internet.
However, the same thing applies in that there is a mistake that things shared digitally are private, as famous people who sent dick pics have found out, to give one example. Or other people who sent private emails that were forwarded and went viral.
Even if they were being sent privately, once it’s out of your hands who knows where it could go.
This is something I tell my students and children. When we did stupid things, no one was there to upload it onto YouTube.