You are blaming the victims of harassment for not protecting themselves from harassment?
Dallas Aranjo

That is not what I said. People who get harassed have the capacity to prevent further harassment from happening by reporting accounts/going private/etc.

Please, don’t twist my words. If we were actually talking about combating harassment as opposed to accusing others of victim blaming, I propose such systems as requiring accounts to have x amount of followers, y amount of posts and z amount of reposts (for example on Twitter, it’d be “retweets”) before they’re allowed to contact a verified account — to get verified, an account mustn’t be popular (or be “in” with a “cool crowd” as it is currently), but provide contact details that can put an otherwise anonymous account to an actual person’s face, as anonymity is too easy for people to spread hate and harassment under. Great for people who desire security. Terrible for people who have experienced (and continue to experience) harassment and abuse.

So in summery, in order to be able to use a system, you must show that you’re to be trusted, and that you’re not just what might as well be another “anonymous sockpuppet account number <insert integer>”.

The system that we have currently allows for flexibility and freedom — which also unfortunately is too free for people to harass others. We have the tools in those systems to prevent further harassment from a singular account, but that’s as far as it can go (beyond using plugins and autoblockers). Complete anonymity is a wonderful, freeing thing — but it’s also a double-edged sword. For me, the choice is complete freedom, or a locked-down ecosystem where people who are typically openly gay on social media will be arrested for homosexuality and subsequently executed in countries that ban it if they are forced to link social accounts to prevent harassment and admit they’re gay.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.