Re:Is Aaron Swartz the Paris Hilton of Web 2.0?
by akkartik on Thursday November 15, 2007 @03:29PM
(#80341)
Let's look at it from the perspective of the target in both cases:
a) Somebody anonymously and publicly calls you names in plausible-seeming ways that others will read.
b) Somebody publicly claims to be better than everybody, including you the reader. Everybody reads him.
It's pretty clear that a is more damaging. Even if it goes out to fewer people. It is fallacious to reason that it's not so bad because it is hurting one person rather than many. On the one hand generality dilutes criticism. On the other the effects of libel can be greatly non-linear in who reads them, and when.
a) Somebody anonymously and publicly calls you names in plausible-seeming ways that others will read.
b) Somebody publicly claims to be better than everybody, including you the reader. Everybody reads him.
It's pretty clear that a is more damaging. Even if it goes out to fewer people. It is fallacious to reason that it's not so bad because it is hurting one person rather than many. On the one hand generality dilutes criticism. On the other the effects of libel can be greatly non-linear in who reads them, and when.