Hacker News Reader

Comment by forapurpose | Hacker News Reader

Who is the author? Why would they attack these women? Why would they spend so much time and effort on it?

It is just Internet bullying - to try to tear apart these people for sport, and even more viciously the objects of attack are people who have more than enough trauma from a horrible experience. Imagine surviving something like that, only to find discussions on the Internet by people who just seem to enjoy hurting you.

[from their about page:]

> I hate stupid people. I see blatant displays of irrationality so often that I don’t even think about it anymore.

[from the article:]

> I don’t know what the fuck happened. But I do know these women are full of shit.

EDIT: I'll add there's plenty of irony in writing the above and calling others 'stupid'. And it's obsessive Internet rants like the article which turn out to be ignorant, deceitful, and a meaningless waste of time and emotion - i.e., 'stupid' - in the end.

View on HN

So you think that calling out someone who makes (very) public, demonstrably false statements for pretty clear personal gain is internet bullying? I would call it being held to account - what sane society would listen to such a ridiculous story and not call it the bullshit it obviously is? Allowing that to happen would lead to a society where fantastic lies are the norm and you’d never know if you could trust anything anyone would say.

If I made statements saying that not only did I discover, but also made love to and raised the children of a dragon to international media, do you think it would be bullying for people to tell me it’s nonsense? If so, you’d have a pretty spectacular definition of bullying if you ask me. We should not allow liars to go unchecked.

The article objectifies and abuses its targets (which is what the author's motive is, per their own about page). The way bullying and abuse work, especially in the Internet age, is that people find a target they feel is justified or merely vulnerable (because everyone else is attacking them) and viciously act out against them. Having a crowd do it allows humans to ignore their better sense and to do horrible things; it's an angry mob and people hide in it as they act badly. As most people on HN probably know, there are many, many such incidents; the abuse does real harm to real people. Hurting other people is wrong; engaging in it for some self-righteous motive is obviously a bad, as is doing it because of 'something I read on the Internet'.

> We should not allow liars to go unchecked.

There are many ways to address deceit; none of the good ones include abusing people. No matter what these women did or didn't do, I think the people that abuse them, including the author, are doing much worse. Where is the check on them?

But more importantly, this article is just 'something I read on the Internet', by someone who announces on their about page the intent to abuse people the author thinks is "stupid" (an ironic statement). Surely we are well beyond trusting such things by now. Where is the check on the liars and, more importantly, the abusers of the Internet?

> Allowing that to happen would lead to a society where fantastic lies are the norm and you’d never know if you could trust anything anyone would say.

A great point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com