19 year old from Florida commits suicide on Justin.tv
newteevee.com
Dude, a kid just offed himself on your service, and BOILERPLATE is the best you can do?
newteevee.com
Do better. Fast.
You HAVE to fall on boilerplate or you will be crucified, by your lawyer if no one else. You just have to pick the right boilerplate:
If what you say has happened, that is a terrible tragedy. We will be conducting an internal investigation of the matter. Justin.tv in no way condones comments of the nature you have described. If we find that someone has breached our acceptable comment policies, we will deal with it as harshly as allowed to by law.
Try this:
"Everyone at Justin.tv is deeply shocked and saddened by this news. In the upcoming days, we will conduct a thorough investigation of the events surrounding this incident, and will cooperate fully with local police and federal authorities. Once all the facts have been gathered and analyzed, we will release an additional statement. Until that time, we will refrain from further comment, except to say that our thoughts and prayers are with Mr. Biggs's family and friends as they come to grips with a sudden, tragic loss."
Yes Justin.tv can say for PR "oh I am deeply shocked and we here would all mourn for 30 days." Lets restrict animated false talks.
edit: I know I am going to be downmodded for being bluntly realistic.
I know the response isn't good PR, but I'm not sure why I or anyone else is supposed to be worried about what the CEO of Justin.tv thinks about the suicide. Maybe they could make it clear to their users to treat such incidents as serious where possible, but how are some kind words supposed to help the situation?
And I think we care because Justin.tv is a YCombinator site, and, more importantly, they all post here and they're good guys. (Bill in particular usually has got stuff worth saying. Maybe others and I don't realize it's them.) So people respond like they do because they know that J.tv people will read it.
It's easy to be a critical asshat on the internet. How much different is your criticism from that of the forum members involved in this incident?
You can tell these guys all about how to respond when it's your business on the stump. Maybe they can't show empathy because it weakens their legal position. I just don't know.
It's natural to mourn, to be empathetic, and for some people it's natural to be assholes. Let's try to keep cool heads in this community and show support for both the family of Abraham K. Biggs, and for the startup involved. They will learn something from this. I hope we all do.
Google cache: http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:iCJ0Fwq-DVwJ:forum.body...
http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:Y6Es8cNik58J:forum.body...
Be interesting to see if some of those guys get tried with second degree manslaughter or something similar.
(My point phrased less cynically: telling a commenter on a forum to kill himself should not be the same crime as flattening someone with your car.)
Yeah, I hate it when consenting adults make their own decisions. I mean, the nerve!! Don't they know that dying is Really Bad?
There will be a public outcry and no doubt some prosecutor is going to try to pin some charges against them.
You do know that this is not the first time that someone has killed themselves on a webcam, right? No charges have ever stuck before, so I don't see why they would this time.
It's basic risk management.
That said, people are always going to pick holes in whatever words you use. They are either not enough or too insincere.
That's precisely why you should have the boilerplate prepared by PR and law professionals.
Justin.tv staff would like to take a moment to recognize and reflect upon the tragedy that occurred within our community today. We respect the privacy of the broadcaster and his family during this challenging time.
Michael Seibel CEO, Justin.tv
This is no ones fault but the adult's (he was over 18). It really is that simple - though you wouldn't know it from the media.
America: where self-entitlement lives on and accountability goes to die.
Unless people here are parto f the community and new the guy (it seems he cried wolf several times) you cant really pass judgement on what was said (except in some of the cases...).
I also see (in the threads cache) people telling him it was a bad idea. I really doubt he was listening to any of them anyway....
A similar thing happened in the Joel on Software Offtopic forum. Idiosyncratic, self described AI researcher Chris McKinstry kept talking about suicide, was mocked, then eventually took some pills and started a thread describing his final time on Earth in periodic posts. No video, and he didn't say where he was, but some people in the thread got close to tracking him down but not in time.
(I used to contribute there, but had stopped before this happened. I found out about it later and dug up the transcript in the archives when I read about it in Wired:
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/16-02/ff_aimyst...
"He posted the message on his blog and a slightly different version on a forum at Joel on Software, a popular geek hangout.")
While I can't imagine egging someone on in that case, it's not our collective responsibility to prevent strangers from harming themselves.
I don't have the answers, but some would argue that by providing the forum and doing nothing - or not enough - to curtail the activities of the people on that forum, there is an element of fault with justin.tv.
Any effort to shift blame onto j.tv for this is little more than an over-reaction caused by a state of grief...while it is certainly understandable, it is equally indefensible.
Well I know, but a lawyer can easily argue that community website operators have a duty to monitor their community for suicides the same way that they monitor for all sorts of other things. (I'm sure if I posted a racist rant it would be dealt with harshly.)
What we're talking about is approximately the moral equivalent of blaming the mayor of New York for someone hanging themselves in Central Park.
I tend to agree with you, but you should also realize that many cities have invested a great deal of money in anti-suicide devices - precisely because they recognize that they could be held liable, and because it's just a nice thing to do.
I'm playing devil's advocate here, so don't take this as my particular viewpoint.
I understand that you aren't necessarily saying that you entirely believe the views you're espousing; any debate in a public forum should be as much (if not more so) of a benefit for the observers as it is for the participants. Clearly stating both sides of an argument helps everyone involved understand the precise nature of the issue.
The fact is we're in such a rush to launch our websites and start being businessmen who actually talks this kind of thing through? Who's asking themselves how best to moderate comments and chat as they scale to protect children. What's your response to someone posting obscene or inappropriate content? and how quick do you act?
There's definitely an inherent danger here, often we build and engineer so quickly and cheaply that we sacrifice having the kind of staff numbers we need to live up to our ethical responsibilities.
All the best to the guys at justin.tv and anyone involved, I'm not judging you for your statement sure you have the best intentions.
It was pretty horrific. We spent about a week being interviewed by the media and trying to limit the damage both to the site and to the perception of AS.
A few media outlets were sensitive towards the issues involved and wrote thoughtfully. Others, however, were sensationalist and did the opposite of what we hoped (e.g. Geraldo's show on FOX).
As if sufferers didn't have enough problems to deal with.
If I was repeatedly mocked and ridiculed, it would only be a matter of time before I went on a killing spree.
As for justin.tv this could cut both ways. The family could sue, their traffic could go nuclear or both could happen. I don't think justin.tv did anything wrong but if you can sue McDonalds for making coffee too hot you definitely have a shot at this. This could also make national news and justin.tv will attract millions of viewers. I think that they need to be really careful to play down any real or perceived financial benefit that comes from this. They got a lot of attention when the cops banged down his door and this will be a much bigger deal. Being "the place to go" for shocking live videos is a double edged sword. Maybe they should donate to charity in the kid's name?
While a confused teenager's suicide is a tragedy, j.tv is also a victim here. The kid unwittingly put a bunch of other young guys he's never met who are just trying to make a startup in the middle of what may become a major witch hunt.
Good luck with this...
Just to clarify, I am referring to the response, not to the actual event.
And yes, I was not referring to the actual incident, but rather the response.
"A poster has said he was going to OD on JTV in the link here: http://www.justin.tv/feels_like_ecstacy. It seems like he is not breathing by the looks of the stream. Please track his IP and alert someone."
And in response, a bodybuilder.com forum moderator said:
"he's an attention whore, you should see all the threads he starts, then deletes"
This might've all turned out differently had the moderators acted on the information available. I'm not saying that it should be illegal for the moderators to not care, just that I personally would have at least looked at the information the poster provided before dismissing it as "just another attempt at attention whoring".
If you wanted to get to know the kid a little bit, or if you wanted to know the mentality of someone on the brink of suicide, here's a link to Bigg's blog: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll...
We must find a way to make the internet a nicer place. Such astonishing cruelty breeds here. Why?
Also, there's so much shocking material and people joking around on the Internet sometimes it's hard to realize what's "real" and what's not. People like guy who pranked Zed Shaw a couple weeks ago certainly don't help: http://zedshaw.com/blog/2008-10-30.html
Seriously though, Zed's personality may suck, but it makes for great reading. As a blog reader, that's all I really care about.
Sysiphuslove:
"I don't think it's so much the anonymity of the poster as the anonymity of the victim. There's obviously a 'real person' on the other end of the conversation, but there's no face, no voice...a victim online is stripped of his humanity just enough to salve the conscience, but not enough to make an unsatisfying target.
An online victim is a perfect blank slate for projection: he is represented only by the narrowest of opinions or acts, with no other definable characteristic besides an avatar and/or screen name. It is satisfying to shoot down these faceless assertions. It isn't really personal, just a private exercise of retaliation.
Look at it this way: when someone pisses you off on the highway, are you mad at the person? Or is it, in some abstract way, the car?"
However, I personally feel that it is the anonymity of the poster more so than that of the victim which contributes to this "astonishing cruelty" that is sometimes evident online. I agree that it's not personal on the part of the poster. In 99.9% of cases, really how could it be? I believe the "private exercise of retaliation" is performed due to stressors in the posters life that he feels frustrated about and powerless to solve. Be those stressors related to work, family, friends, finances or whatever. They get some degree of relief by taking out their frustrations online where they can do so with this effective anonymity.
I think aside from the previously discussed anonymity, it also has a lot to do with what is acceptable for a given social group. People are capable of truly sadistic and terrible acts when they have been made to feel that those acts are acceptable by their peers. When one is not alone in their cruelty, even ostensibly "reasonable" or "normal" people can become monsters.
But well, when someone pisses me off on the road I am squarely pissed at them, not the car they're in, neither in an abstract way or otherwise. I'm not really sure what that analogy is trying to say. Were I a member of an Amazon tribe who had never seen a car before and didn't know what a car was, and one day a car shoots by, nearly running me down, then yeah, I imagine I'd be super pissed at that car.
The anonymity of the poster certainly has a lot to do with it too. I just liked the comment because it gave me a different perspective on the issue.
Yes, that makes more sense and is along the lines of my own thinking above.
People are animals; unfortunately it's the outliers that get our attention.
There's no guarantee that help will be successful of course, but you've at least done what you can.
Do you really think that every time someone talks about suicide on the internet that they are actually serious? Or even most of the time? Certainly I agree that a better support structure is needed, but talking about suicide on the internet may not necessarily be as much of a warning sign as you seem to think (a study on this would probably be reasonably insightful to the matter).
Hopefully it gives the Justin.tv community a reality check. They were egging him on?!? As someone who volunteers on a suicide helpline, I'm amazed that people won't condemn that kind of behavior before it causes real harm.
2) This is a very well known psychological effect called "diffusion of responsibility". It's the same effect that allows hundreds of people to walk by while someone is being beaten up in the street, when almost none of them would just ignore the event if they were alone or in a very small group with no one else around. It's neither surprising, nor "wrong" per se - it's just human nature.
Seriously? Do you have proof of this?
I'm sure Slashdot, news.yc, and Reddit are all "riddled with pedophiles" also. Who cares?
Plus, we should start calling suicide for what it is: cowardice and selfishness, instead of fawning over the poor souls who didn't receive enough love and attention.
Is suicide a crime?
Yup. Dead people don't pay taxes, after all.
I think that's what justin.tv is more concerned with.
How the f--- does facilitating self-perpetuated voyeurism (to this particular degree) add value to society?
That was done to prevent people from creating new accounts for the purpose of repeatedly downvoting someone.
More to the heart of much great humour is timing.
Or are you suggesting that this thread is that hapless teenager's virtual burial place?
It's very likely that the family of that kid will happen upon this forum and that post in the next little while, and I think as a community it would be nice if they weren't met with the same idiotic comments that they'll find on the bodybuilding site.
It's the same thing as making jokes about 9/11 victims on 9/12, but there's no hard and fast rule. Such is the case with pretty much every social nicety.
it really disappoints me to see users with very high karma levels making such obscene, unnecessary and completely non-hacker-news-esque comments. you are hurting this community: please stop.
Shame to see that going away thanks to people like you.
That this comment got modded so high is downright shameful. Rather than disagree and state your reasons you would choose to escalate this into an attack on someone's livelihood. This is intended to be a community where we can speak freely among our peers, and you and your little cheerleading posse have perverted that.
I'm really trying to understand where you're coming from. I don't know if this is simply a last resort because you're unable to articulate exactly why you so vehemently disagree or if this is a threat you intend to follow through with. I can assure you that if you do, in fact, intend to avoid doing business or associating with those you have disagreed with at one time or another you are going to be living in a very lonely world.
I'm glad the guy has an actual personality. I agree with his statement, too. Pills + webcam = boredom.
It doesn't really matter what the Justin.tv CEO said. He pasted some boiler plate because there's nothing more to be said; the deed had been done. What do you want? An apology for not finding the video? For not policing the Internet? Prosecution of anybody "egging him on?" Come on.
Someone broadcast their suicide. That fact doesn't make it any more tragic than any other suicide. It also doesn't mean anybody more than usual was responsible. There's really no story here which is why I chose to make a comment that didn't acknowledge there was.
You may return to being irrationally sanctimonious now.
I came to this forum to escape the Reddit mentality. I'm glad to see that griefers are still being aggressively downmodded here. It gives me hope that the HN community can maintain its quality status.
Oh, so now I'm a guinea pig in a sociology experiment when I come to hacker news?
Nice. That makes it so much better. Don't think I'll be using ticket-bumbler either.
Edit: Note for future.
Ask HN: Paul, Is there a downvote limit on HN?
See, isn't that better?
I guess I'm the only other person who can't see why a pseudo-sentimental canned response is so much superior to any other canned response.
When Pepsi, or the Whitehouse, the police, or whoever else (aside from those who knew the person, weeping or outraged) gives the canned response about caring, does anybody actually believe them when they say "all of us are deeply saddened...", or whatever you're proposing?
By now, people are immune to any type of official response to anything tragic[1], and don't expect (and really wouldn't want) a candid response of any type.
I know it was broadcast live on the internet, which is why it made the news at all but no normal well-adjusted adult (or child, for that matter) will go from "happy go lucky" to killing themselves live on the internet over the course of an afternoon flame war on bodybuilding.com, of all places.
[1]except perhaps missing child, axe murderer on the loose type thing... and then only in Podunk, really.
But this story is a sensationalized love-in because other people witnessed the 'suicide'. I'm certainly not calling 9-1-1 every time I read a post trolling some web forums. 99% of the internet is NOT serious business. Most of the internet is people trying to piss each other off and cause trouble.
Honestly, the best this CEO can hope for is if people forget his company was involved, and worse case is the family ends up on Opera bemoaning how horrible the internet is and calling the CEO out to get involved in suicide prevention and better moderate his company's web properties.
_This story shouldn't be about how the internet is a cruel place that forced someone to kill himself. It should be about the real world being so cruel that not a single person in this kid's life cared enough to notice his problems._
That shows there are plenty of HN users who do not understand HN policy. PG himself has said don't to crazy levels (such as under -10) unless it's obviously spam or the like..
One thing I've noticed a lot in the past is that I'll post something I truly believe or feel but that's slightly contentious. I'll get downvoted to, say, -4 or so in the first few hours, but then voted up into positive territory over a day or two.
Perhaps those who aren't always trawling the site for new items are more realistic in their voting, whereas those who spend more time on the site are hastier and more damning.
Having been in this situation, I'd say that tdavis probably posted that under the same state of mind as I did. And now that I look back, I can't help but conclude that taking that state of mind is the right thing to do. After events like these, certain ideas become treated like "correct viewpoints" that good-thinking people have to have. Such as that America is the good guys, or that this event here was so tragic and that you should be mournful. And now that somebody has come along with a different attitude on the matter, we get to witness a hailstorm of people who don't simply disagree on the matter, but who hate him because his reactions are different to theirs.
Just because most of us would, does not necessarily give us the right to judge someone who doesn't.
However, the people in the towers weren't "America", they were people like you and me, and they were not guilty of "America"'s foreign policy any more than you and me are, and it is a tragedy that they ended up being the victims of this event.
Also, when you have your (and your partner's) business linked in your profile, you should think twice about what you say. Your concern about your reputation may be little, but I'm sure your livelihood is a little more important.
I'm left questioning not only your maturity, but that of user fallentimes, also from ticketstumbler, and even PG and YCombinator itself. I certainly do not want to be associated with people that feel another individual's suicide is a joke. Your business will not see any revenue from me, ever.
The funny thing about the sentence I just wrote is that you could validly echo it back to me. At least the self-indulgence part. Unfortunately for you, I have been thinking about my maturity level while writing this post.
In all seriousness (and my first sentence was serious too), what we have here is that your comment's parent was written by a person who is comfortable with making light of human tragedy, something which you are uncomfortable with. I'm not sure what that has to do with maturity, and in fact I'm not sure what maturity is or why you think that attribute would be a sign of immaturity.
Most people would consider black humour regarding a suicide that basically just happened as inappropriate and immature. After a certain period has elapsed, some venues will allow for such an expression. (The fact that the parent is a -50 in rating as I write this confirms this social norm.)
People who make inopportune remarks tend to be those that are either not able to properly grasp the magnitude of a situation and deal with it in a dignified and respectful way; or even worse, can't pick up on the general consensus of others as to the degree of magnitude.
How well a person can read social situations is by definition, maturity.
I didn't reply here because I doubt the down-vote wave has crested.
There is some threshold of karma you need before it appears. I guess; I'm not worthy either.