Notch donated to Count Dancula (Nazi Pug guy)

Oct 25, 2017
6,775
It's very interesting watching history repeat itself. These few people who were cast off and banned from the old place trying their damnedest to rewalk the same lines with this second chance here, so carefully trying to skirt the lines of what's unacceptable while still trying to promote their filth. I expect an eventual similar response... eventually.
 

legacyzero

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
4,252
Stop you there and not entertain that bullshit. It’s obvious I disagree.
Cool beans. Disagree. That’s ok. But back it up. Tell me why you disagree, otherwise you’re not telling me anything other than you disagree lol.

It's very interesting watching history repeat itself. These few people who were cast off and banned from the old place trying their damnedest to rewalk the same lines with this second chance here, so carefully trying to skirt the lines of what's unacceptable while still trying to promote their filth. I expect an eventual similar response... eventually.
 

RedMercury

Member
Dec 24, 2017
13,059
you just posted "gas the jews" on a forum perhaps we should get you for offensive speech too
Unreal. Sure dude, I'll take my day in court then. I mean, to me there is a marked difference but that's just mu opinion.

Sure, the act of saying words IS an act lol you got me there. CMON man
CMON what?
You implied it by sub-posting at me, then refused to defend it, and yes, calling me a centrist when I’m probably further left than you, may not be that insulting, but you meant it in a gut punch manner.
Look, I never even called you a centrist, I said you were coming from some sort of enlightened centrist position. You don't have to be a centrist to do that, plenty of people who would consider themselves liberal or even republicans have centrist views on some things. I don't now what you mean that I refused to defend it. I don't thin you're further left than me but I think you think you are, but it's not like it's a race or whatever anyways.

The bad faith started with you
I've responded to everything you've asked me in a civil manner.
 

legacyzero

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
4,252
Wait, that’s Spencer? He looks a bit different in that photo. Was it before he started catching hands?

I've responded to everything you've asked me in a civil manner.
Not t initially it didn’t.

You first response to me wasn’t even directly to me

“Says it all really” (paraphrasing)

Hmmmm says what? You still haven’t defended that post, and I’m eagerly awaiting for you to explain it
 

pewpewtora

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,880
Connecticut
I hate both of them, but I still think it's scary that you can face jail time over a joke. It's a stupid and immature joke, yes, but it's nothing you should go to jail over.
EDIT: Also, Notch is a terrible person. Who knew?
 

Big Baybee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,458
I hate both of them, but I still think it's scary that you can face jail time over a joke. It's a stupid and immature joke, yes, but it's nothing you should go to jail over.
Seeing the people he is hanging out with and the kind of people donating to his cause, it’s not really a joke anymore. People are using this situation to advance and mainstream an ideology in the guise of free speech.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Oh. I don’t know who that is.
Pretty much the UK's version of Richard Spencer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(activist)

The above picture is from this interview


Pretty much right-wingers who attempt to come across as articulate and well-educated, which influences the masses. Just watch that video unless you have a zero-tolerance policy for giving a view to an asshole. Watch it because you'll find the way it is packaged is fairly reasonable, and it's not like it's 4 minutes of shouting about killing people and attacking them.

After you jump on to co-opt something, you have to put in the effort to come across like you're being reasonable, or your influence and recruitment machine will fast go off the rails. Tommy Robinson has been spending time attempting to do this, and repackage himself, versus someone like Katie Hopkins who still just blurts out complete shit (Robinson blurts out shit too, but I'm talking about the way he packages it versus Hopkins ~ She's in bed with Milo now). The issue with what Robinson is doing is, it works. He's partially being normalized more and more, and as you may or may not know, lots of Europe is navigating towards being more right-wing. The UK did just recently vote for Brexit.
 
Last edited:
Oct 31, 2017
5,713
Cool beans. Disagree. That’s ok. But back it up. Tell me why you disagree, otherwise you’re not telling me anything other than you disagree lol.
You’re not defending free speech, you’re defending hate speech under the cover of jokes(not even satire). I’ve made it clear I don’t believe many posters are simply “defending free speech”. This thread has a lot more posts than worse examples of free speech being violated.

Again, this thread has a lot more posts than worse examples of free speech being violated. Makes it easy to believe that all you “free speech defenders” are not.

And for a dude who admits to loving to watch hitler speeches in high school, you don’t understand the power of words and how they lead to action. As if the Nazis showed up and immediately starting putting people into camps instead of talking his way into power
 

RedMercury

Member
Dec 24, 2017
13,059
Hmmmm says what? You still haven’t defended that post, and I’m eagerly awaiting for you to explain it
...What? I made a whole post about it, you even quoted it!

What does it "say".

Say what you really mean. Cmon. If it's what I think you're trying to say, let's hear it, so I can respond :)
And I responded here:

Not really interested in the response of someone who is gonna downplay anti-semitic shit tbh. What I really mean? I don't think you're taking in any of what is being said to you, your arguments make sense to you because you believe you're coming from some sort of centrist enlightened position but you're missing the forest for the trees and you're just going to continuously offer defenses of this guy even though you say you aren't defending him and you're just interested in free speech.

"Perceived anti-semitic", you haven't even walked that back when it's total bullshit, I don't think there is anything to be gained from a discussion with you if you can't see that either.
You're just going around in circles, I have no idea what you're getting at.
 

pewpewtora

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,880
Connecticut
Seeing the people he is hanging out with and the kind of people donating to his cause, it’s not really a joke anymore. People are using this situation to advance and mainstream an ideology in the guise of free speech.
Count Dankula has always been a shitlord, so I'm not surprised he's hanging out with Milo and his ilk, but I still disagree with how the courts/judge handled the situation.
 

legacyzero

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
4,252
You’re not defending free speech, you’re defending hate speech under the cover of jokes(not even satire). I’ve made it clear I don’t believe many posters are simply “defending free speech”. This thread has a lot more posts than worse examples of free speech being violated.

Again, this thread has a lot more posts than worse examples of free speech being violated. Makes it easy to believe that all you “free speech defenders” are not.

And for a dude who admits to loving to watch hitler speeches in high school, you don’t understand the power of words and how they lead to action. As if the Nazis showed up and immediately starting putting people into camps instead of talking his way into power
Oh, now I understand why you didn’t wanna elaborate lmao. In the same post, you accused me, and other in this thread rightfully defending free speech, as being Nazi apologists lol. And then made some odd conflations and gibberish about putting people into camps and how words will lead to that? Yeah, on second thought, I’m good lol.

Or as you say: “I’ll stop you right there.”

Pretty much the UK's version of Richard Spencer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(activist)

The above picture is from this interview


Pretty much right-wingers who attempt to come across as articulate and well-educated, which influences the masses. Just watch that video unless you have a zero-tolerance policy for giving a view to an asshole. Watch it because you'll find the way it is packaged is fairly reasonable, and it's not like it's 4 minutes of shouting about killing people and attacking them.

After you jump on to co-opt something, you have to put in the effort to come across like you're being reasonable, or your influence and recruitment machine will fast go off the rails. Tommy Robinson has been spending time attempting to do this, and repackage himself, versus someone like Katie Hopkins who still just blurts out complete shit (Robinson blurts out shit too, but I'm talking about the way he packages it versus Hopkins ~ She's in bed with Milo now). The issue with what Robinson is doing is, it works. He's partially being normalized more and more, and as you may or may not know, lots of Europe is navigating towards being more right-wing. The UK did just recently vote for Brexit.
Oh damn. I’ll watch that shortly. Know thy enemy and all that
 
Oct 31, 2017
5,713
Oh, now I understand why you didn’t wanna elaborate lmao. In the same post, you accused me, and other in this thread rightfully defending free speech, as being Nazi apologists lol. And then made some odd conflations and gibberish about putting people into camps and how words will lead to that? Yeah, on second thought, I’m good lol.

Or as you say: “I’ll stop you right there.”


Oh damn. I’ll watch that shortly. Know thy enemy and all that
Haha ok. I literally never used the word apologist but keep the spin up, you’re doing a great job of it in this thread

It’s honestly rich shit coming from a poster who considers “gas the Jews” as “perceived anti Semitic” as if the anti Semitic parts isn’t the “joke”
 
Last edited:

Tagyhag

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,458
Man, the truth is, the case may seem dumb, but if you go through the guy's history, you'll realize that he's a white supremacist. And i'm not surprised that Notch is defending him.

I'd bet that for him, it's less of an issue about the semantics of free speech, and more about protecting the memes.

Centrist libertarian (dude encouraged Bernie supporters to get Gary Johnson up in the polls) who goes both sides and rooted for Milo, with history of harassing women online? Not a fan of Philip DeFranco.
I don't like DeFranco, I think he's a fence sitter like Boogie. But you can't honestly believe that that woman can publicly attack him in social media like that and he can't show her employers what she's doing. If that's harassment, then every single person who's been fired for something they did online has ben harassed.
 

Hodgy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,822
UK
Unreal. Sure dude, I'll take my day in court then. I mean, to me there is a marked difference but that's just my opinion.
I was just pointing out that things lose their meaning or can be construed however you want f you remove the context from it. Though I probably should've just said that from the get go rather than just be semi-trolly with it

Haha ok. I literally never used the word apologist but keep the spin up, you’re doing a great job of it in this thread

It’s honestly rich shit coming from a poster who considers “gas the Jews” as “perceived anti Semitic” as if the anti Semitic parts isn’t the “joke”
Like this. I feel like im going crazy with a bunch of people stripping all the context from the situation.

he's not advocating to gas the jews. He is making light of an animal as innocent looking as a pug reacting to the statement. its the contract of cute but evil. its not a high brow joke but in context it works.
 
Last edited:

RedMercury

Member
Dec 24, 2017
13,059
I was just pointing out that things lose their meaning or can be construed however you want f you remove the context from it.
I would have appreciated if you had said that versus trolling because there could be discussion to be had there. I think most of us are generally aware you have to be cognizant of the context of things, but what context did I remove? The context in this case is a guy who retweets racists and teaches his dog a nazi salute and says to gas jews and accepts money from a terrible individual.
 

Hodgy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,822
UK
I would have appreciated if you had said that versus trolling because there could be discussion to be had there. I think most of us are generally aware you have to be cognizant of the context of things, but what context did I remove? The context in this case is a guy who retweets racists and teaches his dog a nazi salute and says to gas jews and accepts money from a terrible individual.
the context that the pug stuff was purely played for a laugh.

I'm not denying this guy is a piece of shit. but i still dont feel like he has broken any laws :/
 

Megatherium

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,403
I would have appreciated if you had said that versus trolling because there could be discussion to be had there. I think most of us are generally aware you have to be cognizant of the context of things, but what context did I remove? The context in this case is a guy who retweets racists and teaches his dog a nazi salute and says to gas jews and accepts money from a terrible individual.
You listed the words he said and basically asked “how could this not be hate speech if he said ‘gas the Jews’?” Even if you think that an attempt at a joke is not an excuse for what the guy did, you removed that context deliberately to try to trap someone into just refuting or denying that “gas the Jews” is a hateful statement.

So his response was to strip your words of context and present the same argument, and you defended yourself by saying context matters.

It was quite ironic.
 

Hoo-doo

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,295
The Netherlands
Unbelievable some people are catching bans in this thread just for the sheer gall of not going along with the common thought.
Dude wasn't remotely caping for nazis or downplaying antisemitism, dude was caping for free freaking speech with well informed points that aren't solely based on knee-jerk emotions.
Yet that viewpoint is apparently not allowed because everyone's a Nazi and even shining a small nuanced light on this issue gets you labeled as a 'Nazi sympathizer'.

Come on folks, we should be better than this. We should be embracing discussion and differing viewpoints. Don't let this board become a toxic caricature of itself.
 

RedMercury

Member
Dec 24, 2017
13,059
You listed the words he said and basically asked “how could this not be hate speech if he said ‘gas the Jews’?”
I explained how those were actions and listed them concisely, That isn't what I "basically asked" at all, and it was in *the context* of a conversation with another individual.

you removed that context deliberately
Just because I don't type every bit of context in every post doesn't mean I discount it.

Honestly I'm having some trouble with what your argument is here, do you support what the poster said, do you agree I should be jailed for what I said, are you reiterating what I said in my previous post about everyone being cognizant of context, like it just seems like you're trying to refute something I never said and taking some big leaps. If that isn't the case I apologize!
So his response was to strip your words of context and present the same argument, and you defended yourself by saying context matters.
His response was to troll me, it was ridiculous and he got a warning for being disingenuous, what is there to defend there exactly, or what argument are you trying to make off the back of a disingenuous post?

Unbelievable some people are catching bans in this thread just for the sheer gall of not going along with the common thought.
Some people? It was one dude, and it wasn't for "not going along with the common thought", it was for downplaying antisemitism.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
3,784
If you take this situation at face value - if the guy categorically didn’t have ties to the alt-right and didn’t support nazi ideology - if he did this to make an offensive joke and it was that simple and this was all there was to it - I don’t get how you could call him a piece of shit or demand he be fined or sent to prison. That’s nuts. It’s just dark humour, and nazis have been the source of humour for decades.

But if there is more to it - if he’s made public statements on social media affiliating with extreme right leaning politics - then the context of the joke changes. It becomes less of a joke to wind up a family member by making the dog do something inappropriate - and it becomes an attempt to spread or normalize nazi propaganda.

So I guess that’s why you find it polarizing people, because people will have differing levels of knowledge about the guy, and form their own opinions on the true meaning behind the joke.
Being friends with cunts isn't illegal.
 
Unbelievable some people are catching bans in this thread just for the sheer gall of not going along with the common thought.
Dude wasn't remotely caping for nazis or downplaying antisemitism, dude was caping for free freaking speech with well informed points that aren't solely based on knee-jerk emotions.
Yet that viewpoint is apparently not allowed because everyone's a Nazi and even shining a small nuanced light on this issue gets you labeled as a 'Nazi sympathizer'.

Come on folks, we should be better than this. We should be embracing discussion and differing viewpoints. Don't let this board become a toxic caricature of itself.
Look closely at the shirt the dude is wearing in the picture with Robinson. The only people I know wearing stuff with the Valknut on it are Nazi scum.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,784
For reference...

Retweets and posts about 'traps'
Retweets Infowars
Retweets Breitbart
Retweets Paul Joseph Watson
Tweets about Marie Le Pen (albeit only one so far, where he says she wouldn't have gone to war in Syria. There might be more, I only went back a month)
Predominantly highlights and retweets attacks committed by Muslims
Retweets Pepe memes
Retweets Anne Marie Waters who is talking about dismantling Scotland through mass immigration
Retweets things about why the Scottish government hates Scotland in the context of immigration/Muslims

This is all from the past month.

Just jokes, my dudes.

And it's okay if you want to support a cunt like this, just admit you support him and his 'fight'. Stop with the hand wringing and essay type posts where you throw everything at the wall in defence of this cunt.
And he's a terrible person for all of those things.

Doesn't mean the government should get involved. I will never defend a scumbag like that beyond "it shouldn't be against the law". I'm Jewish, you think I like defending these assholes?
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
And he's a terrible person for all of those things.

Doesn't mean the government should get involved. I will never defend a scumbag like that beyond "it shouldn't be against the law". I'm Jewish, you think I like defending these assholes?
David Baddiel found it a challenge too

For those of you who have not heard of Count Dankula – real name Mark Meechan, of Lanarkshire – he is a self-described “shit poster”. For those of you who don’t know what that is, it’s a man – normally – who uploads videos of himself, usually to comment on other people’s videos, in ways designed to offend. Many such men are alt-right trolls, but others, Meechan included, would more likely see themselves as nihilists who don’t care what they say in search of laughs (or “lulz”), and there’s a strong crossover between the two groups. In recent weeks, because of one particular video, Meechan found himself in receipt of more than laughs: he was charged with, and then convicted of, hate speech. And so the apparently endless debate over what it is or isn’t acceptable to joke about turns a new corner.

In the video, Meechan – a tattooed and bearded Scot with all-ear-lobe tunnel piercings and an undeniable twinkle in his eye – begins by stating that his girlfriend’s pug, Buddha, gets on his nerves. The dog gets on his nerves because, whatever it does, his girlfriend thinks it is cute. Thus, to annoy his girlfriend, he says, he is going to make the pug seem like the least cute thing he can think of: a Nazi. We don’t see the training – it must have taken a considerable amount of time and biscuits – but the high point of the video is when Buddha gives the Nazi salute, raising his right paw and staring up hopefully-sadly at his very own ear-lobe-tunnel-pierced Führer. This is funny (as is the moment later on when Buddha studiously watches Triumph of the Will) because a pug’s sad face is a good comic counterpoint to the power and nobility that the fascist salute strives for. It undermines and subverts the gesture, making it seem ridiculous.
At first, the ethics – to a comedian – seemed clear. Meechan framed the sketch ironically. It isn’t up there with Springtime for Hitler or The Great Dictator, but the intention is on the same lines: to laugh at the Nazis. And therefore he shouldn’t be prosecuted, or next thing you know, Mel Brooks will be up in court on historical charges.

But here is where it gets more complicated: the video is not mainly Buddha saluting, but rather Meechan-as-Dankula saying to Buddha “gas the Jews!”, in the same tone as someone might say “heel” or “shake hands”. Meechan was not convicted – as most people seem to think – for making his dog do a Nazi salute, but rather for saying “gas the Jews” over and over again in a video that has been watched millions of times. That is what the judge decided constituted hate speech.
On a podcast with the comedian Ricky Gervais, we discussed the fact that Meechan “could have come up with a different cue”. Yes, he could. If all he wanted to do was make his cute pug into a Nazi, he could just have said “Sieg Heil” (he does in fact, once), which is less offensive. But the comedian in me was prepared to overlook that; in fact, to accept that going further was an artistic decision: Meechan chose words more obviously offensive in order to make the joke more extreme – and therefore funnier. As long as one still believes his intent was comic, and nothing else, it makes sense.

But the judge disagreed, stating that “the context was irrelevant”. To a comedian this seems odd: if context is irrelevant, then Sacha Baron Cohen should immediately be arrested for posting a video of himself singing the song “Throw the Jew Down the Well” – never mind that he is playing the character of Borat, an anti-Semitic idiot. That’s where the issue lies for comedians in this judgment: any joke that involves taking on the character and voice of something you despise, in order to subvert it, is threatened.
That said, not many comedians spoke up for Meechan after he was found guilty. There was a discomfort around the whole thing, less perhaps about the joke than about who the teller was. Meechan didn’t help his case by turning to various liberal folk devils, including the British provocateur Katie Hopkins and the former leader of the English Defence League Tommy Robinson. Someone who resolutely refused his support was the Father Ted writer Graham Linehan, an expert on the darker regions of the internet. He sent me an article, from the alt-right website the Daily Stormer, which offers a style guide for those wishing to spread neo-Nazi ideas. The key section reads:

Lulz

The tone of the site should be light. Most people are not comfortable with material that comes across as vitriolic, raging, non-ironic hatred. The unindoctrinated should not be able to tell if we are joking or not. There should also be a conscious awareness of mocking stereotypes of hateful racists. I usually think of this as self-deprecating humor – I am a racist making fun of stereotypes of racists, because I don’t take myself super-seriously.

This is obviously a ploy and I actually do want to gas kikes. But that’s neither here nor there.
In other words: if you want to spread the message, do it in a jokey way. Hide in plain sight, or at least behind the veneer of laughter. This gave, and gives, me pause. Both in terms of the case, and, more broadly, in terms of how I think about comedy. It upsets me that an art form, which I love and defend, might be hijacked in this way. The key point, for all comedians, is that context must always be taken into account. And if the true context in any video is to use comedy as a smokescreen for actual hate, I am afraid that free speech can, to put it politely, fuck off. I do not support anyone who says “gas the Jews” and means it.
But here’s the rub: I don’t know if Meechan means it (indeed, he himself may not completely know that either); there’s no evidence he’d ever seen the guide. Yes, it’s a bad coincidence that the example given in the Stormer directive is “gas kikes”. But what I do know is that hard-core anti-Semitism (which I experience online all the time) tends to feel different: more creeping, more threatening, more actually aggressive. And that isn’t quite the Count’s voice. Meechan is, perhaps, something different: a disaffected, bright, working-class white man, one of many who feel hemmed in by social justice warriors and feminists and whoever else can be caricatured as the enemy. This has led him to a kind of comedy in which the main aim is to provoke those people, to say what he likes, to get laughs how he likes; there is, for him, no taking of sides.

Indeed, Meechan has also made jokes about the alt-right’s homophobia and, although some of his videos are featured on the Daily Stormer, there are also complaints about him there, including some for making light of a video game that, in the alt-right’s eyes, promoted white genocide. You cannot make fun of such things, according to the Daily Stormer.
But you can if your aim is to annoy everybody. At some level, this may have something to do with an almost tragic maleness, with the feeling that if a man isn’t allowed to joke about whatever he likes any more, his manhood is threatened. To support his position, Graham Linehan sent me a photograph of Meechan holding up a flag with another young man: it is the flag of Kekistan, an imaginary internet utopia where trolls can operate unhindered by censorship. And yes, the Kekistan flag looks more than a bit Nazi; and yes, there will be neo-Nazis taking up cyber residence there. Though when I put it to Linehan that this was about maleness, he also agreed: “These are just lonely guys looking for connection and finding this . . . shit”, he said.

What this story is about, really, is going from a place of certainty to one of uncertainty. I was certain I supported Dankula in principle; now I am not. Unfortunately, this is also something that the Daily Stormer actively advocates: remember “the undoctrinated should not be able to tell if we are joking or not”. All of us who would instinctively vote for comedy and free speech in the face of legal clampdowns and other restrictions need to be aware of the doublethink discourse at work, that the thing we most prize might be being used against us. (I do also wonder whether any Jewish schoolchildren are now hearing “gas the Jews!” shouted laughingly at them, because some other children saw a man say it on the internet to his dog and it was so lulz.)
But in the end, I have to come down on what I think is the side of comedy. Partly because my own currently touring show, which spills my family’s secrets across the stage, dances all over the line of what is and isn’t acceptable to joke about. There is a story towards the end of the show involving my dementia-ridden father essentially offering up the possibility of a sexually criminal act to a female mourner at my mother’s funeral, which, every night, gets a laugh which is not just a laugh: I can hear in it shock and uncertainty and disgust and offence, too. And this is a type of laughter that I believe comedy should aspire to, because it is an art form.

I’ll leave you with this. The funniest thing ever made, Peter Cook and Dudley Moore’s Derek and Clive, includes a sketch in which Cook improvises a bit about watching a documentary about Nazis and being so unconsciously influenced that he got on the bus to Golders Green, and – to quote Clive – “must have slaughtered at least 18,000 before I realized what I was doing”. Cook isn’t really satirizing Nazis there. He is not being Mel Brooks or Sacha Baron Cohen or Chaplin; he’s simply enjoying the thrill of saying something so awful in a throwaway manner. It’s hilarious. It’s also, in my view, ethically and comically more or less what Count Dankula did in his video. Obviously Cook was a genius while Mark Meechan is not. But we can’t put people in prison for not being geniuses. And if there is a comedy genius in Meechan’s video, surely it is the pug – even though he was only obeying orders.
https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/count-dankula-nazi-dog-baddiel/

Minor correction around saying "hate speech", as that isn't the charge, but it's an attempt at convering all angles.
 

dr_octagon

Member
Dec 31, 2017
240
it’s like Robin Hood airport joke / teenager reposting song lyrics - the prosecutions are not warranted and there is no public interest

people should not conflate their own personal dislike or the character of a person to justify such bad decisions. nobody has to like the guy (and by all means call him a cunt) to see there is an obvious case to defend which has serious implications. the judge saying context doesn’t matter is absurd
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Audioboxer I disagree with its ultimate conclusion but that is a really good article, thanks for posting
Yeah, it's a pretty balanced take, with some education on how the alt-right work.

David Baddiel may be Jewish, but he's also a comedian as should be apparent, and many comedians will either publicly or privately be fairly cautious of a law around being "grossly offensive". For a lot British comedians especially, it's almost their livelihood.

The only bit David and other comedians probably need to consider, is what the barrister I posted earlier claims

The relevant part reads as follows:

127 Improper use of public electronic communications network
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he—

(a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character;

One or two points need to be noted.

First of all, the crime is only committed when someone sends a “grossly offensive” message or other matter “by means of a public electronic communications network.” Being grossly offensive is not a crime if done privately, nor, indeed if it is done on a stage.
Notably,

Being grossly offensive is not a crime if done privately, nor, indeed if it is done on a stage.
Therein lies one of the big issues with this law, not just around the subjectivity of being "grossly offensive", but that the general public, for the most part, are all over the place with what could and can get you arrested and charged. Hence why some comedians started the "panic" of "Can I now be arrested for telling jokes on stage?". Apparently, no. You'd also imagine the police wouldn't go after anyone with money for being "grossly offensive", hence why PewDiePie did not get arrested.

Mainly because of the roots of this law itself focussing somewhat on telephone calls and mail

Secondly, the offence is not a new one. Although it is currently to be found in the Communications Act 2003, it has its origins in the almost identically worded s.10 (2)(a) of the Post Office (Amendment) Act 1935. The drafters of the 1935 statute had telephone and telegram communications in mind. As Lord Templemore put it in the House of Lords:

I come now to what is probably the most important clause of the whole Bill … [it] is designed to give the Post Office staff protection in cases where, for example, people have indulged in improper or obscene language over the telephone to female telephonists. During the debate on the Second Reading in the House of Commons it was suggested that the public should also be protected and subsection (2) has been designed accordingly. In its three paragraphs protection is afforded not only against the improper use of the telephone but also the telegram. Cases have occurred where members of the public have received over the telephone messages of an indecent character, and even of a menacing character. There have also been instances where telegrams have been sent to persons intimating that somebody is seriously ill and when inquiries have been made by anxious friends or relatives the message has been found to be a complete hoax. There have also been cases of annoyance caused by persons who persistently use the telephone to make calls without reasonable cause—usually late at night. This subsection will give the Postmaster-General the necessary power to protect the public.”

We have come a long way from a statute aimed at criminalising hoax telegrams and offensive remarks to female telephonists, to one that is now used in an attempt to prevent offensive material appearing on You Tube. S.127 of the Communications Act has become one of the principal means by which the internet is policed. It has done so, though, with very little debate about whether it is appropriately worded to deal with modern issues. It is one thing to protect individuals from grossly offensive personal telephone calls; it is quite another to protect groups of people from what are in effect public performances.
YouTube/Twitter/Facebook and social media in general are falling into a "weird place", because they are not private, and they are also not a "stage" or some sort of private event. The UK police, notably the CPS, is taking it as if social media is similar to making a telephone call to someone else, and being offensive towards them on the phone. So if someone complains about your social media post, or video, you can essentially be arrested and charged.

This would explain how sending the police a screencap of an Instagram account lead to an arrest and charge over the N word.

The lyrics, said to have come from a song by US rap artist Snap Dogg, were ‘kill a snitch n**** and rob a rich n****.’

Angela Conlan, prosecuting, told the court that the words were posted to the bio section of Russell’s Instagram account, and then reported to police last year.

The content was then passed to Constable Dominique Walker, who is based within a specialist police hate crime unit.
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/woman-who-posted-rap-lyrics-14543694
 

Code Artisan

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
805
never have heard of this guy before (dancula). people here are saying he's alt right but someone shared this on discord
 

Messofanego

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,701
UK
Pretty much the UK's version of Richard Spencer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(activist)

The above picture is from this interview


Pretty much right-wingers who attempt to come across as articulate and well-educated, which influences the masses. Just watch that video unless you have a zero-tolerance policy for giving a view to an asshole. Watch it because you'll find the way it is packaged is fairly reasonable, and it's not like it's 4 minutes of shouting about killing people and attacking them.

After you jump on to co-opt something, you have to put in the effort to come across like you're being reasonable, or your influence and recruitment machine will fast go off the rails. Tommy Robinson has been spending time attempting to do this, and repackage himself, versus someone like Katie Hopkins who still just blurts out complete shit (Robinson blurts out shit too, but I'm talking about the way he packages it versus Hopkins ~ She's in bed with Milo now). The issue with what Robinson is doing is, it works. He's partially being normalized more and more, and as you may or may not know, lots of Europe is navigating towards being more right-wing. The UK did just recently vote for Brexit.
EDL, BNP, British Freedom Party, AND Pegida UK. Hitting all the British Nazi checkboxes, this Tommy Robinson fella.
 

Deleted member 15326

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,219
Hilarious that a dude who taught his dog to react to “gas the Jews” is getting financial support from terrible people

All jokes tho right ha ha
 

Suiko

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,928
Audioboxer I disagree with its ultimate conclusion but that is a really good article, thanks for posting
Yeah, I agree. It adds considerably to the discussion.
It walks partway to a solution, but ultimately does not offer one.
In its place it ponders an issue that is going to become more and more prevalent, and I think provides an important lense to view future situations with.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
what do you mean?

talking about discord, i have subscribed to a few servers wich have several thousands of connected users, lot of stuffs are being shared. discord is truly great.

edit: And thank you for replying.
The only discord I use is for FootyEra and then I'm not always using it. Migrating to here was the only reason I even installed discord lol. My phone's on telegram more often, but that's cause of Android development. I wish all these communication apps were unified. It seemed to start off with WhatsApp and now there are lots of them.

I always thought discord was for PC gaming voicechat and as primarily a console player I never bothered with it until Resetera was opening. It's basically just... a modern take on Yahoo chat rooms. I bet there is more non-gaming stuff on it now than gaming.