Super-Twat

[Regulator]

Laurence Fox has twittered that he is instructing lawyers to act against a twitter user who called him a racist.

Suddenly Laurence Fox isn't so keen on free speech when the free speech is about him.

I assume that’s the same Looza Fox who is being sued by three people for calling them ‘paedos’ on Twitter. 

Given that Fox is undeniably racist (despite having tried to erase his worst Twitter pronouncements) the only winner here will be the lawyers.   

I wonder who’s paying for this latest legal foray?  One of the right wing American lobbies no doubt...

[Hot Flatus]

I wonder who is paying for his entire campaign

[Hot Flatus]

 

[andrewc]

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/so-what-does-laurence-fox-stand-for/     "Fox told me he looks forward to the next person who calls him a racist, so he can sue, with the bonus that ‘everybody will have to pay attention then’."


The person he's threatening to sue works for TimeOut and had that on her Twitter bio, without a "views my own, not my employers" disclaimer.   If he thinks he can get a nice settlement & apology from the magazine that may have influenced his decision £££££....   

[Mr Larrington]

Laurence Fox has twittered that he is instructing lawyers to act against a twitter user who called him a racist.

Suddenly Laurence Fox isn't so keen on free speech when the free speech is about him.

I assume that’s the same Looza Fox who is being sued by three people for calling them ‘paedos’ on Twitter. 

Ah yes, but you see “paedo” doesn’t actually mean “paedo”.  It's just a general insult.  This is called “the Elon Muskrat defence” after the Super-Twat who first used it.  Foxy-woxy is obviously hoping that this argument will work for him too, and thus have him mentioned alongside the fearsomely bright omni-successful multi-billionaire in places other than, say, forum threads calling out Super-Twats.

[ian]

Laurence Fox has twittered that he is instructing lawyers to act against a twitter user who called him a racist.

Suddenly Laurence Fox isn't so keen on free speech when the free speech is about him.

I assume that’s the same Looza Fox who is being sued by three people for calling them ‘paedos’ on Twitter. 

Ah yes, but you see “paedo” doesn’t actually mean “paedo”.  It's just a general insult.  This is called “the Elon Muskrat defence” after the Super-Twat who first used it.  Foxy-woxy is obviously hoping that this argument will work for him too, and thus have him mentioned alongside the fearsomely bright omni-successful multi-billionaire in places other than, say, forum threads calling out Super-Twats.

As mentioned, it was the insult du jour in my c80s school playground, though as we were all about twelve, so yelling 'paedo' was probably a fair assessment.

It was the time of burgeoning stranger danger* and paedobears, I guess, where your only defence was a Blue Peter-mandated paedo-defence made with a washing-up liquid bottle and sticky back plastic.

Anyway, it was up there with 'bender' and 'Joey.'

*at least once a term, there'd be an outbreak of suspicious vans and abduction attempts, not one of which was ever real. Panics were quite the thing, I caused one myself by spotting a UFO. There was an epic and semi-regular one where everyone thought the kids from Hyson Green – rufty tufty Nottingham bit – were going to get on a bus, travel several miles, just to fight our school. Kids were getting tooled up, teachers losing control, to the point we all had to be sent home early. Made no sense at all, of course, they weren't going to do that, for starters they probably didn't have the bus fare.

[citoyen]

Anyway, it was up there with 'bender' and 'Joey.'

Are you a bender tied to a tree?

[citoyen]

The person he's threatening to sue works for TimeOut and had that on her Twitter bio, without a "views my own, not my employers" disclaimer.   If he thinks he can get a nice settlement & apology from the magazine that may have influenced his decision £££££....

Is there any legal basis for such a disclaimer being required? Unless it's actually published in Time Out or on one of their official channels, it's surely not their responsibility.

[ian]

The person he's threatening to sue works for TimeOut and had that on her Twitter bio, without a "views my own, not my employers" disclaimer.   If he thinks he can get a nice settlement & apology from the magazine that may have influenced his decision £££££....

Is there any legal basis for such a disclaimer being required? Unless it's actually published in Time Out or on one of their official channels, it's surely not their responsibility.

IANAL, but I read an article by an actual barrister about disclaimers a while back, and no, they're effectively pointless. If it's not a Time Out account and there's no evidence to assume she's posting messages at the behest of her employers, then I'd suggest he's on a highway to a large and pointless legal bill.

But honestly, regardless of which side of the fence they come from, I hate these tedious Social Media I'm getting my dad solicitor to beat you up.

Also, Lozza: fucking snowflake.

[citoyen]

IANAL, but I read an article by an actual barrister about disclaimers a while back, and no, they're effectively pointless. If it's not a Time Out account and there's no evidence to assume she's posting messages at the behest of her employers, then I'd suggest he's on a highway to a large and pointless legal bill.

Yes, that's what I thought.

Also, Lozza: fucking snowflake.

 

Anyway, you didn't answer my question: are you a bender tied to a tree?

[Hot Flatus]

Just how badly do you want to find out?

[citoyen]

No biggie, just a simple yes or no will do. 

ETA: just remembered the question should actually be "Are you a benny tied to a tree?" but benny=bender, iirc.

[Regulator]

Laurence Fox has twittered that he is instructing lawyers to act against a twitter user who called him a racist.

Suddenly Laurence Fox isn't so keen on free speech when the free speech is about him.

I assume that’s the same Looza Fox who is being sued by three people for calling them ‘paedos’ on Twitter. 

Ah yes, but you see “paedo” doesn’t actually mean “paedo”.  It's just a general insult.  This is called “the Elon Muskrat defence” after the Super-Twat who first used it.  Foxy-woxy is obviously hoping that this argument will work for him too, and thus have him mentioned alongside the fearsomely bright omni-successful multi-billionaire in places other than, say, forum threads calling out Super-Twats.

As mentioned, it was the insult du jour in my c80s school playground, though as we were all about twelve, so yelling 'paedo' was probably a fair assessment.

It was the time of burgeoning stranger danger* and paedobears, I guess, where your only defence was a Blue Peter-mandated paedo-defence made with a washing-up liquid bottle and sticky back plastic.

Anyway, it was up there with 'bender' and 'Joey.'

*at least once a term, there'd be an outbreak of suspicious vans and abduction attempts, not one of which was ever real. Panics were quite the thing, I caused one myself by spotting a UFO. There was an epic and semi-regular one where everyone thought the kids from Hyson Green – rufty tufty Nottingham bit – were going to get on a bus, travel several miles, just to fight our school. Kids were getting tooled up, teachers losing control, to the point we all had to be sent home early. Made no sense at all, of course, they weren't going to do that, for starters they probably didn't have the bus fare.

Yes, we know you don't think it's particularly important if you're called a paedophile on social media (you've told us at length previously) but other people do - particularly when allegations like that have the potential to impact their careers.

[ian]

I'm not, marsupial bondage is not my thing.

Actually, the 'Joey' thing is a bit sad, and a reminder of how wretched children are (I'm not up on current playground slurs, ours were big on 'spaz' and 'mong'). Admittedly 'bender' wasn't much better.

Still, we were kids, not sure what adults on Twitter have as an excuse.

And yeah, Reg, I think it's childish shit from people who think social media is real life and perhaps ought to grow up. Really being called a paedo on social media affects your career? You can call me a paedo, I don't give a shit.

[Hot Flatus]

Really being called a paedo on social media affects your career? You can call me a paedo, I don't give a shit.

Ah....but you are anonymous. We don't know your name, what you look like, who you work for.

If we did what would be your boundaries for libel or slander?

I'm pretty sure that if I asked you for your full name and photo for me to post on twitter that you are a paedo you would suddenly very much give a shit.

[Regulator]

I'm not, marsupial bondage is not my thing.

Actually, the 'Joey' thing is a bit sad, and a reminder of how wretched children are (I'm not up on current playground slurs, ours were big on 'spaz' and 'mong'). Admittedly 'bender' wasn't much better.

Still, we were kids, not sure what adults on Twitter have as an excuse.

And yeah, Reg, I think it's childish shit from people who think social media is real life and perhaps ought to grow up. Really being called a paedo on social media affects your career? You can call me a paedo, I don't give a shit.

So you're OK with a high profile gay man, working for a national charity, being called a 'paedo'?  Or other public, identified figures?

If so, it says a lot...

[ian]

Why, is there any evidence that I'm a 'paedo'? Is it a genuine allegation or childish name-calling? I think the latter unless it's a genuine allegation, which in the majority of these stories it seems to be thrown around like a playground insult, and with much the same weight. Childish. If I call you a 'motherfucker,' it's not because I genuinely believe you are fucking your mother (that's really between you and her).

People should grow up, come on, if you wouldn't do it face-to-face in the real world, why do it online?

[orraloon]

A 'Joey' is...?  🤔  No comprende.

[citoyen]

Why, is there any evidence that I'm a 'paedo'? Is it a genuine allegation or childish name-calling? I think the latter unless it's a genuine allegation

The key factor is not whether it's true or not, but whether it causes reputational harm.

I'd be surprised if L.Fox calling someone a paedo on twitter is taken seriously by anyone, but I guess that's now up to the courts to determine.

[citoyen]

A 'Joey' is...?  🤔  No comprende.

You wouldn't get this unless you were a child in Britain in the 80s, specifically one who watched Blue Peter.

[Polar Bear]

One persons childish insult is another persons deeply hurtful accusation.  And, such childish accusations can damage mental health, reputation and employment prospects.

We have vecome a society where bullying has almost become acceptable.  How utterly vile.

[Regulator]

One persons childish insult is another persons deeply hurtful accusation.  And, such childish accusations can damage mental health, reputation and employment prospects.

We have vecome a society where bullying has almost become acceptable.  How utterly vile.

Yebbut ...as long as the contrarian reactionaries aren't offended it's OK apparently...

[Polar Bear]

One persons childish insult is another persons deeply hurtful accusation.  And, such childish accusations can damage mental health, reputation and employment prospects.

We have vecome a society where bullying has almost become acceptable.  How utterly vile.

Yebbut ...as long as the contrarian reactionaries aren't offended it's OK apparently...

Ah.  I see ...

Presumably if they are offended then they just need to grow up?

[ian]

Am I a contrarian reactionary? I should get t-shirts made.

If we want to live in a free society then people can't concomitantly have the right not to be offended.

Someone will be along in a moment to say oh you think actual threats and allegations are ok then?

Which, of course, I don't. But anyway, people calling each other names on Twitter, sigh. My initial point was that it's as endearing as kids calling each other names in the playground, just that these people have had a couple of decades to mature.

[ian]

A 'Joey' is...?  🤔  No comprende.

You wouldn't get this unless you were a child in Britain in the 80s, specifically one who watched Blue Peter.

He was a man with cerebral palsy, spent most of his life institutionalised, wrote an interesting book about his experience and was showcased by Blue Peter in one of the early attempts to destigmatize disability.

Of course, school kids took his name as a generic insult, because they're school kids. Looking back, a pretty shit thing to do (and my point, now I suspect lost in usual foment, is that while kids might have the excuse of immaturity when tossing around objectionable insults, adults really should know better and, well, behave like adults).