3

From what I understand, bullying happens when someone is harmed through an online system that puts them in contact with other users, sometimes masking their identities.

From Wikipedia:

Cyberbullying is defined in legal glossaries as

  • actions that use information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm another or others.

  • use of communication technologies for the intention of harming another person

  • use of Internet service and mobile technologies such as web pages and discussion groups as well as instant messaging or SMS text messaging with the intention of harming another person.

From "Cyber Bullying Law & Legal Definition":

Examples of what constitutes cyberbullying include communications that seek to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate the recipient. The actions are deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior intended to harm another.

As such, could the "downvote" button, which is a major "feature" of the SE website, be considered a bullying tool?

It allows people to collectively, but in a hidden manner, criticise the work and input of a single user (instead of discussing with them to tell them they disagree).

This can in turn create a situations in which someone can feel like a group of people is against them, or voted down their content in order to harm them, or do not want to communicate their reasons to them (feeling of domination and exclusion can be reinforced if the person downvoted, as is often the case for a new user without "privileges").

The intent behind each downvote is not clear, and some users could downvote in order to harm if they wanted, this is a possibility and privilege given to them.

Or a user who believes they have been harmed by a down vote could claim the downvotes were made out of hatred since downvotes can be done without justification.

To summarise, could a bullying case involving a new user who got his question downvoted stand in court?

NOTE: I couldn't find "cyber-bullying" and "online-crime" or any related tags in there but feel free to add them if needed.

Community
  • 1
MicroMachine
  • 627
  • 7
  • 14
  • Thanks for commenting. A claim could be filed against the system itself that allows the anonymous and systemised "putting down" of users? My question is about a system that allows you to be anonymous while you put someone down, and whether it's totally what bullying is or not. – MicroMachine Sep 26 '15 at 22:38
  • 3
    In what jurisdiction? The precise definition of legal terms depends on jurisdiction; note that "the US" is not a good enough jurisdiction (it varies from state to state here). – cpast Sep 27 '15 at 00:07
  • Cyber bullying laws have not really been tested in court for their constitutionality. Additionally, most bullying laws are generally enforced by schools, but as long as speech is taken off school grounds and outside schools hours several circuit courts including the Third Circuit Court of Appeals have ruled it's impermissible under the 1st amendment to levy such punishment. – Viktor Sep 27 '15 at 03:01
  • 2
    I think there is a misinterpretation here - a downvote is linked to a question or answer, not an individual user - if someone were to go follow all of a user's activity and downvote them, regardless of the content, then it would be against the stack's rules and the mods would probably try and figure out what is happening (similarly to going to all of a user's posts and up-voting them and thus gaming the point system). – user2813274 Sep 27 '15 at 14:53
  • 1
    @nomenagentis when voting is anonymous to the moderators, how can moderators do anything against serial voting? – Philipp Sep 27 '15 at 17:44
  • @user2813274 I hear what you're saying. But bullying has a lot to do with people's feelings, if they post a question they'll have emotions attached to it, cause they wrote it. I think there is bullying as soon as there is a feeling of being harmed/hurt from a user. The question is whether this system is systemizing putting down other users with the down button. Imagine a very vulnerable newcomer who gets voted down ("rightly" or wrongly) and cannot even comment on their own questions to try and understand, or even delete it, I assume a feeling of social harm could be present. Them vs me. – MicroMachine Sep 27 '15 at 19:38
  • @fabriced people can choose to become offended or upset over anything and everything, however if you look at the definitions given in the OP, bullying requires intent to do harm - accidentally offending someone over a downvote hardly qualifies, as the downvoter would likely never even know about it causing harm - at what point do you draw the line, not up-voting because then the person is depressed that they don't have a lot of shiny points? – user2813274 Sep 27 '15 at 19:45
  • @user2813274 what you are saying seems a bit out of touch with the reality of human psychology. Following your logic, people claiming to be bullied could very well be faking it. It's a slippery slope. Maybe out of, 20 downvotes on the same Q, 10 of them are from users thinking the Q is bad, and 10 of them just "follow a herd" and abuse their privileges of being able to down-vote a newcomer. Chances are down-voting hurts. Since there is an ambiguity and the system doesn't ask for a reason to downvote, the system is open to unjustified harmful behaviours. Users are emotionally linked to their Qs – MicroMachine Sep 27 '15 at 19:52
  • @fabriced Sorry if I seem out of touch, as I have not seen anything close to -20 votes without even a comment as to what is wrong - yes, "follow-the-herd" mentality is bad, but that is why the downvotes cost some rep from the caster as well. Also, this is on Law, not Psychology - the laws were relatively clear as far as requiring intent, not so much as to how sensitive the receiver is or if that even matters – user2813274 Sep 27 '15 at 20:04
  • Good call @user2813274, although I believe (maybe wrongly?) that in law, sometimes, and this obviously tends to say that the answer to my OP would be "case-by-case", the person who files a claim and their feelings need to be addressed for there to be a "case". It is implied by my question that I assume some terrible cases could arise from the existence of this system and the down-vote button (seen on very few other sites, too!?). For example a case in which someone is vulnerable, and feels hurt or cornered by downvotes or their anonymousness, and ends up scarring themselves or anything else – MicroMachine Sep 27 '15 at 20:15

2 Answers2

13

No.

I can't give a more detailed answer without reference to a specific statute. But just about every state anti-bullying statute in the U.S. restricts the definition to...well, bullying. There is a good summary of state bullying and cyberbullying statutes here.

The laws are varied, but they invariable contain words like "harassment", "abuse", "threatening," "fear," and "hostile environment."

Would it be possible to "cyberbully" someone on Stack Exchange under some of these statutes? Sure. You could do it in comments; in answers; even in questions. "Question: Is Bill in my algebra class a dork, or a tool?" Comment: "This is a terrible question, and I'm going to burn your house down. Downvoting." You could probably fit something like that under some of the broader statutes--although they still for the most part haven't been tested for First Amendment issues.

But I don't know of any statute broad enough to include downvoting a question or answer, on a site people post on knowing that the whole purpose of posting is to allow their posts to be upvoted and downvoted.

If there was such a statute--and again, I don't know of any--it would almost certainly be unconstitutional. There is no law against hurting people's feelings, at least in the United States, and a law that allows people to seek legal redress for someone saying "I disagree with you" is pretty much the poster child for a First Amendment violation.

chapka
  • 5,827
  • 18
  • 22
-5

Can Stack Exchange's down-voting system be considered online bullying?

Like chapka said, no it can't. But I'd say it's sometimes associated with online bullying.

From what I understand, bullying happens when someone is harmed through an online system that puts them in contact with other users, sometimes masking their identities. From Wikipedia: Cyberbullying is defined in legal glossaries as

• actions that use information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm another or others...

I'd say that happens on stack exchange, but it happens everywhere. People are people. For myself I don't like the anonymity that some people hide behind, and I don't like the anonymous voting. I think stack exchange would be a better place if everybody used their real names and their voting history was transparent.

Examples of what constitutes cyberbullying include communications that seek to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate the recipient. The actions are deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior intended to harm another.

Yes, and that would primarily occur in a chatroom or in comments. Whilst dishonest downvote collusion could be described as falsely discrediting somebody, it isn't in the same league as ad-hominem abuse and malicious lies.

As such, could the "downvote" button, which is a major "feature" of the SE website, be considered a bullying tool?

Maybe, but IMHO it would be minor one.

It allows people to collectively, but in a hidden manner, criticise the work and input of a single user (instead of discussing with them to tell them they disagree).

I'd use the word discredit rather than criticise. Yes it can be used maliciously, and I think it's a source of problems for stack exchange.

This can in turn create a situations in which someone can feel like a group of people is against them, or voted down their content in order to harm them, or do not want to communicate their reasons to them (feeling of domination and exclusion can be reinforced if the person downvoted, as is often the case for a new user without "privileges").

Yes, and then the new user departs. Or the expert user departs, and stack exchange is the poorer for it.

To summarise, could a bullying case involving a new user who got his question downvoted stand in court?

No. It can be counterproductive, and unpleasant, but there's no actual words being used, and no threats or intimidation. You can't describe it as bullying.

Community
  • 1
John Duffield
  • 91
  • 2
  • 4
    Hi, John, welcome to Law. In general, answers should cite text from a given law, or else provide a source for a reputable interpretation of a law, if that specific law is mentioned in the question. In this case, though, a citation would be really good. This appears to be ~90% opinion. Can you add such citations to improve your answer? Thanks. – HDE 226868 Nov 14 '15 at 22:06
  • @HDE 226868 : The law is formed from opinion. I can't add such citations to improve my answer, but what I can add is that sometimes stack exchange "moderators" participate in and/or give free rein to abusive anonymous cyberbullying, and then unfairly penalise posters who oppose it. Whilst arguably anecdotal, this IMHO presents a major threat to the Stack Exchange business model. It's one thing for SE to provide a platform wherein criminality occurs, but it's another thing altogether for its officers to participate in, and aid and abet such criminality. This is the heart of fabrice's question. – John Duffield Nov 15 '15 at 00:45
  • 3
    The law is formed from opinion based on precedent and policy, not anecdotal evidence. In any case - you say that the downvoting system can't be considered online bullying (and this almost certainly means that all components of it - the downvote button, the reputation removal - cannot), but then you say that the downvote button can maybe could be considered a bullying tool. Could you please clarify? As it stands, this answer is rather confusing and unhelpful. – jimsug Nov 15 '15 at 01:00
  • @jimsug : the real issue here is that SE unfairly suspends posters for opposing cyberbullying, then permits other posters to impersonate the banned user, and gives free rein to cyberbullies who say things like "The 'cool down' suggests that there might be comments we cannot see anymore to trigger that". This is what's called heading for a fall. I hope that's helpful. – John Duffield Nov 15 '15 at 01:06
  • 1
    Umm, no it's not helpful. The internal logic of your answer is still contradictory. That comment doesn't address the issue that I mentioned, which is that you appear to answer that downvotes cannot be considered online bullying, but that the button maybe can. It's like saying that stabbing someone in the heart can't be considered homicide, but that a knife maybe can be considered a tool for homicide (though perhaps that example is somewhat extreme). And please don't use Law SE as a platform to complain about your issues on other sites. – jimsug Nov 15 '15 at 01:09
  • @jimsug : the internal logic is crystal clear. There is no contradiction. The moot point is that whilst downvoting isn't cyberbullying, Stack Exchange though its "moderators" actively participates in such, and this is a threat to the corporation. You can pretend it isn't happening, but if you do, one day this will bite your arse off. I hope that's helpful. And irony of ironies, a downvote. – John Duffield Nov 15 '15 at 01:27
  • 1
    @jimsug : you've changed your comment. Please don't do this. And please,don't talk about shooting people in the head. As for "issues on other sites", the OP concerns stack exchange. If there were no issues, we wouldn't have questions like this. – John Duffield Nov 15 '15 at 01:45
  • 5
    There's no irony in downvoting a poor answer - whoever did it is justified in doing so. – jimsug Nov 15 '15 at 01:54
  • 6
    John, this answer (and the associated comments) is a rant. Pure and simple. Your responses to @jimsug's comments say as much, and as I reread the answer, it comes off as more of a meta-style string of complaints. You don't like parts of the system, and you're using this question to say so. Even if what I've just said is false, I stand by my original point, because, as jimsug has said, laws aren't built up from these sort of cases. As such, they are irrelevant. Please focus on the question itself, and cite something reputable to back up your points; otherwise, it comes across as a rant. – HDE 226868 Nov 15 '15 at 03:12
  • @fabrice d : I don't feel bullied, if that's what you're thinking. Like I said in my answer, downvoting isn't bullying, but it could be symptomatic of bullying. It's an interesting subject. If some big kid hits you, that's not bullying, that's assault. Bullying is when he keeps on doing it, and the school doesn't stop it. And sometimes, pretends it isn't happening. I have some personal experience of this with my own children at school, and IMHO the situation is somewhat similar in social media. – John Duffield Nov 15 '15 at 09:59
  • 1
    @John, whether or not the institution attempts to prevent or stop the act has nothing to do with whether it is bullying or not. The person allegedly doing the bullying will be found to be bullying or not based on their own actions, and not whether others attempt to intervene. – jimsug Nov 15 '15 at 12:01
  • @jimsug : the act itself is (say) assault. Bullying isn't just one act, it's a series of such acts. It often occurs within an institution that says it has a zero-tolerance attitude to bullying, but actually turns a blind eye to it. It's like the big kid's name is Flashman, and he's a prefect. I've had notes saying "your child was involved in an incident with another child" to explain the bruise. And when I've investigated, I've found that the same kid hit mine, again. Schools cover it up. – John Duffield Nov 15 '15 at 12:24