Log in

No account? Create an account
The Argument Clinic

the_daily_rag posting in The Argument Clinic
User: argument_clinic (posted by the_daily_rag)
Date: January 16th, 2015
Subject: Why did @the_daily_rag get nuked by the Twitter Gods?
Security: Public
Tags:blue bird tabloid, cyberbullies, cyberbullying, twitter
Up until the nitwit I never made specific tags to do news on a cyberbully. He was the first, the #NitwitNews was for him. It was an already existing, but seldom used, tag for tweets about stupid criminals; seemed a good fit. The thing was that shortly after I started using it, he started using it too, try to confuse the matter...

...which is when I made @TheNitwitNews to retweet any and all reports made by me, or anyone, that had to do with the nitwit's cyberbullying.

Then there was #ManicMidgetNews made for this annoying little rape tweeting cyberbully, and an account for official tweets about him... and so on and so forth and, you get the idea.

Twitter informed me that my news accounts got suspended for all being used for the same purpose, and that it was one person using them; part of the appeals process was I had to list what accounts were mine and what I was using them for. While commendable they were being used for documenting those abusing others, the fact I had so many was bad.

Part of why I had so many was the reason above, cyberbullies will start to use the tags you use to report their abuse... and towards the end there The Rag was doing news on a lot of cyberbullies. So, as far as it goes, I might've gotten just a tad carried away.

Although, in my defense, I only did news on cyberbullies while they were trying to abuse me and others I knew. When a cyberbully ceased attacking others, fell off the grid, I stopped all news about them. Not a hard thing to do either, I'd much rather not have anything to do with any of those scummy bastards.

If scummy bastards seems a lil' harsh, consider:
Exhibit A) The nitwit uses pedophilia, rape tweets, descriptions of screwing dead animals, and a whole lot of other disgusting stuff to bother people with. He creates child accounts he writes scenarios of those he targets being abused by, and outside of his abuse he trolls Twitter for pics of underage kids not wearing a lot of clothes.

Exhibit B) Frankie Cage, as he likes to be known, claims he only wants to engage in fantasy rape play, but when he can't find anyone to do that with he starts doing it to people who don't want it. When they complain, he abuses them even more for getting upset he sent them detailed descriptions of raping them, as though it's somehow their fault he's doing this.

Conclusion: I think that more than merits those 2 being fairly scummy.

According to the nitwit & Frankie, who clearly aren't the pillars of any community, The Rag got suspended for cyberbullying someone who the nitwit dragged into my life. See, the nitwit came after The Rag for a challenge as opposed to who he usually targeted, but about a year in and 200+ of his accounts suspended due to news I did and filed reports... he started trolling Twitter to find other abusive cyberbullies to send my way.

This is why I had so many news accounts, one for each of those redirected cyberbullies.

All previous ones the nitwit sent my way were pretty much the same, but not so much that last one. Guy was in a class all his own, and far worse than I at first believed... and, as stated here & there, the less said about him the better. I initially tried to show him how the nitwit really was, which seemed to work for a bit, but then he started spreading lies and making false accusations and...

...and there I go typing about him again.

However, said unmentionable keeps agreeing with the nitwit that I was cyberbullying him.

Was I?

Truth, I'm not 100% certain I wasn't.

When he was doing the same stuff all other cyberbullies I ran into did, I treated him just as I treated them. The focus of his attacks were primarily on 2 other people I didn't know, and 1 I now wish I knew less of. It's just when he set his attention on me he started saying things I was doing that had no basis in reality:

· He said I made violent threats against him, which I didn't.
· He said I was homophobic, which I'm not.
· He hashtagged my name to the National Suicide Hotline, which was just weird.

Pointing out those 2 first things weren't true didn't do any good. I said they weren't true, he said they were. Apparently a lack of any supporting evidence didn't seem to be a factor for him, and so he kept repeating it to anyone who read his content as though it were the gospel truth and not what it actually was, a fabrication from deep within his own deluded mind.

Some cyberbullies saying random bad things about someone doesn't concern most, but this guy has 100+ accounts that he retweets his crap to.

Since The Rag's has been gone the nitwt's been trolling any mention of it's account name to spread his usual load of crap about why it's gone. Generally pointing out it's the nitwit doing this has been proof enough for anyone to give him the eyeroll he deserves; you tend to lose credibility when you pretend roleplay accounts are real people that you reference the suicide of said fake person to tell others it's okay for them to commit suicide too.

The nitwit isn't the only one to fake the death of a person they pretended was real, but he is the only one I know that keeps going on about the same fake dead person for years, efven to people that weren't even connected to the situation.

Still, though, was I cyberbullying?

On the one hand, I say no. I've always maintained that doing the same things cyberbullies do back to them isn't a good thing. You can only counter their excessive dishonesty with truth. What I did was document the abuse of cyberbullies so others could see it, with screenshots of them doing it. Yet, even with that I'd gotten to the point I was documenting several cyberbullies with multiple accounts, some of those abusers that were interacting with each other to support their abusive efforts calling for news accounts about them to make dual reports and...

Yeah, it's kind of a confusing gray area.

Basically, on the other hand I still say no but it's a very on shakey ground kinda no.

What I can say for sure is the following: I didn't make any threats, I didn't make up things about those I reported on. Reported activity of those cyberbullies I did news on was accurate, supported by screenshots showing them doing it. I just got a little carried away.

Of course, by a little I mean a lot.

Already got some ideas for the next newspaper, when I get around to making it, to avoid any such confusions in the future.
Post A Comment Flag Link

my journal
January 2015