Hacker News Reader

Comment by richbell | Hacker News Reader

> This is not to defend the terrible things being done to this guy, but if he just went dark people would lose interest/age out of fucking with him.

It's my understanding that he flagrantly disregards law-enforcement's advice. Any time he is tweeted at — let alone SWATed — he makes a large public spectacle. He often compulsively replies to every single person on Twitter, including branded company accounts, accusing them of being criminal stalkers.

To reiterate, that is in no way a defense of what people are doing to him, but he is by no means doing himself any favours by how he reacts. Though, how a police department can be so incompetent that they continually respond to phony calls is beyond me.

View on HN

The funniest thing the trolls did was buy the copyright to his headshot he uses as his twitter profile picture and DMCA him.

That's crazy. So indirectly, he is actually incentivizing others to keep on looking for a reaction out of him.

Yeah. It’s the bullying feedback loop - there would be no point in bullying someone if you didn’t get a reaction out of them. If you reliably freak out in a grandiose way you’re just reinforcing yourself as a good bullying target by providing entertainment for your bullies.

And if you do not defend yourself, you are just an easy victim.

Can we please just stop victim blaming here?

There is a subtle difference between "victim blaming" and pointing out the (unpleasant yet real) mutual behavioral effects in such a situation.

Everyone has the right to defend themselves, but however they act can have potentially unintended effects beyond their control on the other party.

The main takeaway here is that it might be beneficial to consider these social mechanisms in ones reaction, independent of the fairness aspect.

The charitable take is that it's advice on how a victim could react in such a situation to minimize further harm. Similar to how police typically recommend that victims of armed robbery not attempt to resist. Of course it is not the victim's fault they are in that situation. Perhaps GP could have phrased it better...

As I've said, I cannot excuse the swatters or police for this behavior. It's clearly unacceptable. I'm merely trying to explain why someone would be targeted like this to begin with - because they provide a consistent source of entertainment for the swatters. It's not solely because of a random comment on Twitter.

Sadly, yes. He's rightfully pissed off — and I don't think victims of harassment should have to go dark online or isolate themselves — but the reaction and the spectacle is usually what the perpetrators want. The old adage "don't feed the trolls" exists for a reason (see also, "grey rock method").

With torswats in custody, hopefully no one else is dumb enough to pick up where he left off.

Bad news, then, from TFA:

> Their relief was short-lived. A new Telegram channel named “Torswats Return” was created by someone claiming that their “partner has been arrested”, according to posts viewed by The Independent.

> The channel stated that it would continue offering “swats” for as little as $40, and offered returning customers a discounted rate. It also posted derogatory photographs and text about Mr Tomlinson — noting that there would be no charge for requested swats against him.

> “And of course swats to Patrick… are free,” read the Telegram message.

I read the article.

Anyone can create a Telegram channel and post messages, that just reads like the work of an edgy troll. I suppose only time will tell.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com