NationStates Jolt Archive

We all know there are TOS at Jolt and NS, but I am wondering what you think are the limits when you post comments on someone's blog (especially a blogger you can't stand).

Meet Deb Frisch, a psychologist and adjunct professor at the University of Arizona. She posted some comments on the blog Protein Wisdom. Now, she got pretty weird. You tell me if this sort of comment crosses a line (I know it would cross a line at NS).

I'd like to hear more about your "tyke" by the way. Girl? Boy? Toddler? Teen? Are you still married to the woman you ephed to give birth to the tyke?...

[...] as I said elsewhere, if I woke up tomorrow and learned that someone else had shot you and your "tyke" it wouldn't slow me down one iota. You aren't "human" to me....

Ooh. Two year old boy. Sounds hot. You live in Colorado, I see. Hope no one Jon-Benets your baby. ...

I reiterate: If some nutcase kidnapped your child tomorrow and did to her what was done to your fellow Coloradan, Jon-Benet Ramsey, I wouldn't give a damn. ...

Give your pathetic progeny (I sure hope that mofo got good genes from his mama!) a big fat tongue-filled kiss from me! LOTS AND LOTS OF SALIVA from Auntie MOONBAT, if you don't mind! ...

I am SHAKING, I tell you, SHAKING!!! in my boots at the prospect at an FBI and/or state police trooper tromping down my driveway to see if I was a threat to the progeny of the pissant name of Jeff "pissant" Goldstein of the pathetic, neutered, sissified, state of Colorado....

Wanna escalate this game. Fine wit me...


Proffesor Frisch didn't even trying to conceal her remarks. She posted them on Goldstein's blog for all to see, along with her signature. She now claims "I made a joke on a blog about the death of a nasty rightwing blogger's toddler."

Your thoughts?

What makes you think that this was posted by someone called Proffesor (sic) Frisch. What kind of professor spells "with" without an h?

As to the question, what is too far?

Too far is when it is libel or slander. The same rules that apply to all other forms of verbal or written communication. There is nothing different about it being on-line in this respect.

Frankly, I agree that I wouldn't care if rightwing bloggers walked off a cliff with both eyes wide open.. and a little shove. But going after a kid is over the line. Unless of course, possibly, there was indoctrination going on.

What on earth is she talking about:confused:


*Wonders where this is going*

What makes you think that this was posted by someone called Proffesor (sic) Frisch. What kind of professor spells "with" without an h?

As to the question, what is too far?

Too far is when it is libel or slander. The same rules that apply to all other forms of verbal or written communication. There is nothing different about it being on-line in this respect.

The FBI was interested enough to determine that it indeed was Professor Frisch. She was forced to resign her post.

The FBI was interested enough to determine that it indeed was Professor Frisch. She was forced to resign her post.

That information was not included, hence the question. If the FBI are involved, then there is some law that has been broken. (Which, I wouldn't know) Thus it is too far.

I assume that you posted this just for political capital then, as the question has already been answered. Which makes you as bad as she was.

Your thoughts?


I read about this. She apparently trolls right wing blogs flaming everyone in sight.

Check out her blog:

http://www.debfrisch.com/

And the starting point of it all:

http://proteinwisdom.com/

Well, if that post is legitimate -- and I have a hard time believing any professor would be dumb enough to antagonize someone like that and involve an infant in the process in a public space of any kind -- it's closer to threatening than flaming and possibly actionable threatening at that.

Thing is, I've seen false posts from both Liberals and Conservatives designed to discredit or slander the blogger/poster they dislike.

The problem is that political sectarianism has deformed the shape of honest debate in this country. BOTH sides are responsible.

Regardless of the source, posts like that are utterly childish and worthless and only damage the cause they'd nominally support.

Also, anyone who's ever been to Colorado knows that "sissified" is the last thing it is. Head on up to 12,000 feet and say that without gasping, pardner.

EDIT: Retract the "if". She's a whackjob.

That information was not included, hence the question. If the FBI are involved, then there is some law that has been broken. (Which, I wouldn't know) Thus it is too far.

I assume that you posted this just for political capital then, as the question has already been answered. Which makes you as bad as she was.

So you believe the limit is "breaking the law" and not some arbitrary lower limit?

The FBI was interested enough to determine that it indeed was Professor Frisch. She was forced to resign her post.
No shit? What a loon. She deserved to be canned and is a disgrace to academia.

Well, if that post is legitimate -- and I have a hard time believing any professor would be dumb enough to antagonize someone like that and involve an infant in the process in a public space of any kind -- it's closer to threatening than flaming and possibly actionable threatening at that.

The FBI found it to be 100% from Professor Frisch. And she admitted it.

So you believe the limit is "breaking the law" and not some arbitrary lower limit?

Yes. Given that there are no local regulations to be obeyed (TOS here).

And what federal law was possibly violated that it warranted the involvement of the FBI?

And what federal law was possibly violated that it warranted the involvement of the FBI?
Good question.

Threatening kidnapping (and committing that threat across state lines) would probably do it.

It surprises me, but not much. Right and Left are basically resorting to character assassination. If I looked hard enough, I could find a Right version of Ms. Frisch. I simply don't want to read this vitriolic horseshit, no matter who spews it. Frisch deserved to lose her job. If you can't argue reasonably and without personal attacks (on a child, no less), you don't deserve a professorate. Get a cable-news chat show like everyone else.

Good question.

Threatening kidnapping (and committing that threat across state lines) would probably do it.
There was no threat of kidnapping.

It surprises me, but not much. Right and Left are basically resorting to character assassination. If I looked hard enough, I could find a Right version of Ms. Frisch.
Looked hard enough? Are you blind and deaf or do you just not read anything put out by anyone associated with the neocon movement - the entire thing is based around character assassination of "liberals."
You have to look hard to not see Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, etc etc.

And what federal law was possibly violated that it warranted the involvement of the FBI?
Someone's feeling was upset and they called the FBI claiming a threath. The FBI investigated.

That'd be my guess.

Talking about your kid on a blog is just asking for trouble.

Talking about your kid on a blog is just asking for trouble.
He was probably bragging about how he was indoctrinating the kid that liberals are the big bad wolf and ate grandma by providing social programs for immigrants.

Looked hard enough? Are you blind and deaf or do you just not read anything put out by anyone associated with the neocon movement - the entire thing is based around character assassination of "liberals."
You have to look hard to not see Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, etc etc.
Yes, but do they saunter into other pundits' sites and post a lot of vaguely threatening, vitriolic tripe? And just because the arch-neocons are asshats, does that mean Liberals should reply in kind?

He was probably bragging about how he was indoctrinating the kid that liberals are the big bad wolf and ate grandma by providing social programs for immigrants.
Maybe you should read the blog and see what he was saying that got her so angry.

There was no threat of kidnapping.

So you're saying this couldn't be constituted as a threat?

"Ooh. Two year old boy. Sounds hot. You live in Colorado, I see. Hope no one Jon-Benets your baby."


Looked hard enough? Are you blind and deaf or do you just not read anything put out by anyone associated with the neocon movement - the entire thing is based around character assassination of "liberals."
You have to look hard to not see Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, etc etc.

And since the poster said that there were right wing versions, it seems you're just continueing w/ the "character assassination". I guess you missed this part" I simply don't want to read this vitriolic horseshit, no matter who spews it."

He was probably bragging about how he was indoctrinating the kid that liberals are the big bad wolf and ate grandma by providing social programs for immigrants.

Wrong again. More unsupported "character assassination".

Yes, but do they saunter into other pundits' sites and post a lot of vaguely threatening, vitriolic tripe?
Do they need to? They do it on national television and in nationally published books.

Maybe you should read the blog and see what he was saying that got her so angry.
Why don't you just cite it.

Maybe if I don't respond to Kecibukia long enough his head will explode from not getting enough attention.

Do they need to? They do it on national television and in nationally published books.


Why don't you just cite it.

Maybe if I don't respond to Kecibukia long enough his head will explode from not getting enough attention.

Translation: I'm not going to bother responding to anyone who seriously questions the nonsense that is spewing out today because I can't support any of it.

He was probably bragging about how he was indoctrinating the kid that liberals are the big bad wolf and ate grandma by providing social programs for immigrants.
That doesn't really change whether or not it's asking for trouble. By "trouble", I just mean "highly unpleasant comments".

Pantless, apparently it was enough to make the FBI confront her, and enough for her to lose her job.

So it wasn't harmless, as you might imagine.

Of course, now she views the whole FBI as part of some vast right wing conspiracy to silence her.

Maybe you should read the blog and see what he was saying that got her so angry.

What did he write?

Can't see to find it.

Pantless, apparently it was enough to make the FBI confront her, and enough for her to lose her job.

So it wasn't harmless, as you might imagine.
Saying stupid shit doesn't, or shouldn't, warrant a visit from the FBI. Maybe local sheriff or police, not the FBI.

And you still havn't cited what she was replying to.

Saying stupid shit doesn't, or shouldn't, warrant a visit from the FBI. Maybe local sheriff or police, not the FBI.

And you still havn't cited what she was replying to.

Hell, I linked to his site and DK named it.

Here ya go:

http://proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/20639/#comments

I hope she gets the psychiatric help she needs

Saying stupid shit doesn't, or shouldn't, warrant a visit from the FBI. Maybe local sheriff or police, not the FBI.

And you still havn't cited what she was replying to.
http://proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/more_from_the_tolerant_left/

http://proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/antecedents/

We all know there are TOS at Jolt and NS, but I am wondering what you think are the limits when you post comments on someone's blog (especially a blogger you can't stand).

Meet Deb Frisch, a psychologist and adjunct professor at the University of Arizona. She posted some comments on the blog Protein Wisdom. Now, she got pretty weird. You tell me if this sort of comment crosses a line (I know it would cross a line at NS).



Proffesor Frisch didn't even trying to conceal her remarks. She posted them on Goldstein's blog for all to see, along with her signature. She now claims "I made a joke on a blog about the death of a nasty rightwing blogger's toddler."

Your thoughts?

You could decline to read and spread the trolling I suppose. That'd teach the bastards.

We all know there are TOS at Jolt and NS, but I am wondering what you think are the limits when you post comments on someone's blog (especially a blogger you can't stand).

Meet Deb Frisch, a psychologist and adjunct professor at the University of Arizona. She posted some comments on the blog Protein Wisdom. Now, she got pretty weird. You tell me if this sort of comment crosses a line (I know it would cross a line at NS).



Proffesor Frisch didn't even trying to conceal her remarks. She posted them on Goldstein's blog for all to see, along with her signature. She now claims "I made a joke on a blog about the death of a nasty rightwing blogger's toddler."

Your thoughts?


I thought it was flamming boogers and it might be cool...but this just about another nut case .

I don't think flame and trolling warrant a visit by the FBI, unless the threats scalated and there could seriously be something to it. She clearly is a nut-case looking for attention and doing it through the relative safety of the internet, but bloggers and webmasters in general can delete the comments they don't like.

You could decline to read and spread the trolling I suppose. That'd teach the bastards.
But then where is the drama? Where? What would we be without drama!!??

But then where is the drama? Where? What would we be without drama!!??
Here on NS General!

I suppose I have an adamant hatred for anyone who infringes upon my First Amendment rights.

If you write a blog, and espouse and rant on any given subject, I have the right to tell you what a douchebag I think you are.

I do draw the line at threatening anyone with harm.

But then where is the drama?

Where?

What would we be without drama!!??

The theatres

The theatres!

Point taken.


MY LEGS! I CANNOT FEEL MY LEGS!


Ah now THAT friends and neighbors is drama!

Your thoughts?

My thoughts are that this was way, way over any line, particularly the comparisons to the poor child murdered in CO and this blogger's child.

This type of behaviour should never ever be tolerated, at the very least it should draw a unanimous shunning of the offender or law enforcement involvement, as it seems to have in this instance.

I'm saddened by how people's own personal politics are so firmly entrenched that even in this thread they will attempt to excuse inexcusable behaviour and demonise the victim.

Threatening the childer isn't on. And to be honest, I didn't see enough there to get even mildly irritated at, let alone get a proffssor to go bunny-boiler. The woman needs the medi-care she has no doubt paid for.