This is what an ignorant jackass looks like

[laceblade]

Okay, so it appears as though Something Awful has deleted the offensive post* made by a Wiscon attendee at her request. Indeed, she is so sorry.

So here is my question. I am assuming that people are going to want to discuss what happened. People should discuss what happened, and IMO, how it can be prevented next time.

I still have the window open on my laptop with the original post. Should I post the text in a public post so that it might be accessible to the interwebs once more? If so, where would be most appropriate: my personal blog, or the Wiscon blog? Is it offensive to re-post the material, or is it more offensive for the perpetrator to hurt people so egregiously and then do a hand-wave because she "did not even begin to consider how much harm it would do to people"?

I'd rather not re-post the pictures in my blog, and I'm not even sure that I could. If the post was deleted, I don't think that I can save them, even if they're still on a web browser window that's been open for hours.



*In case you missed it, someone who attended Wiscon spent her time snapping photographs of people without their permission, removing their faces from pictures, and uploading them to the Something Awful forums with some of the most hateful and ignorant commentary I have ever seen in my life. She attended panels such as "Fat is Not the Enemy," took pictures of people whom she considered to be fat, and then hatefully mocked them for the rest of the world to see, often posting people's names with the pictures. I felt physically ill reading the post, and was nearly in tears by the end of it.

I am disgusted and ashamed that this girl attends my University, and presumably lives in this city. I hope for her sake that our paths never cross. Verily, words would be exchanged.
(Thank God for Facebook, so I know what she looks like, am I right?)


ETA: Read the comments for a link to the first half of the original post. Also, the threads of that post on the SASS forums contain lots more pictures (did people find flickr pools?). People seem to be posting lots of just random photos from Wiscon, including a cute picture of littlebutfierce, raanve, and someone I don't recognize. NORMALITY, IT TRANSLATES TO LOLS. I guess I'm just really out of touch with Internet humor. I don't get it.

ETA2: One of the Con-Chairs has posted to the Wiscon LJ community, asking people to please cease violent threats of any kind. The post is here. Please sit tight, people. The Con-Chairs and ConCommittee are aware of the problem and working on it. Please refrain from posting personal information about the person in question, etc.

Also, the thread on SASS seems to be using pictures from the Wiscon Flickr pool in an ever-increasing number of posts. If you have photos of children on Flickr, please lock them. If you took photos of people without asking for their permission, I would recommend locking those as well, until you obtain it.


EDIT 3: Do not threaten the original poster (that's just stupid). Do not post her personal information (there is more than one person with her name in the world). If you happen across her personal information, I would go with: Do not contact her.

EDIT 4: If you want to disagree with my friends and I in the comments, that's fine. But if your comments are in any way derogatory, they will be deleted. I am open to discourse, but will not tolerate slurs.

Comments

[animal-eyes.livejournal.com]

But wait!

Is this the same thing? I don't see any names.
http://sass.buttes.org/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=498992

Frankly I think you do what you want. Sure, she got it removed, but it was already on the internet, and that pretty much makes it fair game. Ask the Wiscon group if they want it or if they'd rather it not me perpetuated any more.

[maevele.livejournal.com]

apparently someone emailed her implying they would contact the UW if the post stayed up. and she shared that with SA to get them to remove it. right before reposting it. someone from SA posted it at the 2nd site, looks like.

eta: looks to only be the 1st half of her OP.

posting from wii. bad.us

[maevele.livejournal.com]

I can not get screenshots as I am on the wii, dammit. what possesses someone to bring kids into their assholery?

[heyiya.livejournal.com]

Ugh. That is just sickening. Not just the body hate but the transphobia, the abuse and dehumanization pretending to be humour...

I guess not even WisCon can be utopia, but I still find that post deeply shocking and a betrayal of my sense of overall happiness and joy about WisCon. Not that I didn't know there were problems, but that is a lot, well, worse than I would have expected.

*tries to put self back into WisCon happybubble*

[antarcticlust.livejournal.com]

This is so disgusting and infuriating. I almost feel that someone should do something to make this public in a way that draws negative attention to this person. The things she says (about hating women, etc.) are so pathologically disgusting that I can't even begin to understand what the hell is going on in her head. As Jeremy said, how much must she hate herself to go through such meticulous lengths to hurt people? This is entirely too thorough to have been done without thinking, as she claims.

[littlebutfierce]

Oh, I'm so honored to be included in the photos. *eyeroll* Wow, people are assholes.

[perigee.livejournal.com]

You know, I really was upset to have to miss WisCon 32. It'll be an interesting WisCon 33, I think.

But to know I missed out on this shit makes me feel both relieved I wasn't there for it and pissed off that I wasn't there to help try to protect my friends from it.

[sheana.livejournal.com]

I don't know about reposting it... but honestly, have you considered reporting her to the university ombudsman? Clearly this is an issue of harassment (possibly sexual harassment, depending on the university policy). Additionally, since she put the content out there, she's responsible for it, regardless of what site it gets disseminated to.

Additionally, she should be publicly held accountable for her actions, including her name and university affiliation. Just as a many activists would give harsh criticism to any faculty in a program that said/did such things, so would many criticize such student behavior. It suggests that her department - and perhaps the larger university - not only condones, but embraces such behavior. This is, I'm guessing, not the message either wants to send, and I'm sure they'd do something if notified.

Because it wasn't working where I wanted to post it

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

You asked if people were allowed to post photos they took of people (abent consent) to the net.

The answer is... maybe.

In general, photography of public spaces is legal. The convention was in a private space, but one which allowed photographs, at which point it is as if it were a public space.

Publishing recognizable images of people requires a release, but there are exceptions. In news stories, people who were present may be published.

Absent profit, use of identifiable images isn't automatically an infringment, so long as the use isn't otherwise defamatory. In this instance, the question of news is the first line of defense, and the hassle of getting it sorted out is likely to be higher then the likelihood of easy resolution allows.

The real question here is, who took the photos? If one doesn't have copyright, then the publishing is an infringement. Hotlinked images are one thing (they are being republished, and the owner can change the url, effectively denying any infringment, so it's not so heavily frowned on). Some images (such as flickr) may have tools for blogging; which is consent to republication; but it too can be revoked.

If, however, the image has been copied, stored and then publised... infringement.

At that point legal action can be taken. The first step is for the copyright holder to file a DMCA notice of infringement (this is most effective when done through a lawyer). If the image isn't pulled down in 72 hours of a valid complaint the ISP will be fined up to $25,000 per day.

This is usually an effective incentive to immediate removal.

Be aware that the copyright is held by the photographer, not the subject. False claims of DMCA violations are actionable.

IANAL, all of the above is based on my understandings of the law, and the DCMA as a professional photographer, and onetime journalist.

TK

[moominmuppet.livejournal.com]

Just a quick note of support for all the Wiscon folks; I've caught up on the whole mess because I have a bunch of friends who attend. I've been meaning to make it for years, and this just makes me more determined to do so next year.

[sparkymonster.livejournal.com]

A quick coment on your ETA2. It's unclear to me if WisCon members are actually sending her violent threats. COnsidering that the SA people started making mocking her the minute she asked the thread be removed, it would not surprise me at all that they send her threats.

Also, WRT pictures from the WisCon flickr pools. I agree that you may want privatizing them temporarily. This won't affect pictures already posted in the SASS threads, unfortunately.