Wow LaShawn thx for pointing this one out. I will cite this as a resource on my blog. Have a nice day.

Having opined on this matter already, this seems the logical next step.

If I own a store, cafe or other commercial operation, I have the right to ask, then tell, people that aren’t behaiving up to standards to leave. Why should a blog be different?

It shouldn’t. I never said otherwise. In fact, I specifically said the LSB can and should (and obviously does) engage in her own self-policing. I recommend that and condone it wholeheartedly.

My point is that being annoying is not a CRIME, wherein the GOVERNMENT does the policing. In fact, to make government acts as the enforcement arm of civility — i.e., by making “trolling” a crime — is the ultimate in “PC” thinking.

Again, it becomes an entirely different situation where the “troll” starts making threats, and that is what the new law addresses.

The whole idea of trolling is mind-blowingly absurd anyway. How twisted does a person have to be to want to waste their time harassing other people they don’t even know.

For the big time professional bloggers, I know trolls are a big problem. Sadly, trolling has forced many of the best bloggers to turn off commenting, which is awful.

Kman runs a day care center and advertises services in the newspaper. By Kman’s definition this is a “public” enterprise.

I bring my loud-mouthed, turrets syndrome child who is fascinated by fire to be a client in Kman’s day care center.

After one hour of screaming profanities and setting other kid’s clothes ablaze, Kman tells me to take my child home and never return.

Kman is thin skinned and unwilling to accept diversity and cutting edge cultural avante guarde shifts.

Kman is the problem and needs political correctness classes in order to accept the nuances of the “new order.”

Or not.

Kman writes: “Legally, if you open your ‘property’ to anyone, you can’t make a claim of ‘trespassing’. It’s as simple as that.”

Kman has not headed for the mall (privately owned and open to the “public”) and annoyed a store owner. In all 50 states, the store owner can cause Kman to pass by the store without incident and keep Kman from entering the store.

Kman should call the local public prosecutor and check me out on this.

La Shawn I do hear you about people not knowing what it is like. I’ve also found that those who make the most noise about their “right” to say whatever they like on some-one’s blog are generally the most troll-like – or are trolls. Genuine people respect the space and can have reasonable discussion. You write what you have to say – and it’s online for future reference. You aren’t running a socialist web co-operative where you are advertising any and all opinions in space you pay for. And in terms of time – trolls waste it. It is time consuming dealing with their comments/emails – and that time could be used productively in other ways.

I’m not sure about the law – although I think freedom of speech is not the issue because, as far as websites/blogs go it is a matter of the rights of a private property owner.

Wasn’t there some guy working at Fidelity Investments who trolled you not too long ago?

Lastly, to help your readers: CONTEXT makes a great deal of difference. Example:

THIS IS WHAT I THINK OF TED KENNEDY

Now, if you were to just link to the sound bite—now that’s just juvenile.

Kman,
If I own a store, cafe or other commercial operation, I have the right to ask, then tell, people that aren’t behaiving up to standards to leave. Why should a blog be different?
As for harrasment and trolls and legal definitions, I’d suggest you take an hour or three out and check out La Shawn’s archives. She’s had trolls that have graduated to stalking and harrassment, in my opinion. With regard to the change in the law, it’s just nice to know that somebody in the legislature is finally begining to recognize that the internet exists, and it’s not just for nerds and shut-ins anymore.

My guess is, some congresscritter was getting cyber-stalked or harrassed and a lawyer pointed out that it was a bit of a grey area. Now that one of them feels the pain, action was taken.

Your analogy works against you. Legally, if you open your “property” to anyone, you can’t make a claim of “trespassing”. It’s as simple as that.

LaShawn has created a public forum. As moderator, she can make her own rules. She can (and thankfully does) insist on politeness, respect, etc. She could, for example, decree that all commenters post in Italian. Whatever she wants — that’s HER right as moderator of her PUBLIC forum.

But she cannot expect the legal arm of the government to police HER rules. Because it won’t.

Now, that’s just the way it is. That’s the way the law works.

Okay?

In my prior comment, all I was saying is that “harassment” is a legal term, with a specific legal meaning. I was cautioning against LSB’s readers misunderstanding the term and spreading disinformation.

So… if a troll comes onto this forum (or any similar one), insults the host and others, makes lewd comments, and won’t go away, it is definitely annoying and wrong.

And it may feel like you being “harassed”.

But it is not “harassment” in the legal sense, unless it rises to the level of actual threats. Therefore, this new law isn’t going to be of any use in stopping anonymous trolls, and people shouldn’t be under the impression that they now have some new weapon in their anti-troll arsenal. You don’t.

Again, I’m not defending trolls; I’m just telling you what the law is.