English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

Robusto

16:20

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Send that one to Daniel Tosh.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

who's that?

KitFox

fry face

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I think that's a good example of teenagers being stupid then crying about it.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox Please tell me you're not blaming the victim?

KitFox

The judge specifically instructed her not to talk about the case. She tweeted it, now she's crying that it's her right.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox You don't think she has the right to speak about what happened to her?

KitFox

16:30

She was ordered by a court not to talk about it.

And she violated that order.

She's clearly in contempt.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

And you think that court order is just? fair? within the first amendment?

KitFox

I think I am not privy to the details of the gag order.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

it's a standard thing in many jurisdictions where you're not allowed to "publish" the names of young offenders.

KitFox

But I also think the judge probably considered all those things.

It's not like they slapped her with charges for underage drinking.

She was instructed not to talk about the case.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

But I think it's fundamentally wrong for a victim to be unable to talk about what happened.

KitFox

16:33

I'm sure there was a good reason for the gag order.

MetaEd

Even if there was a bad reason for the gag order, what you do is appeal.

KitFox

And she can talk about what happened without naming names.

She willfully flouted a judge's order.

Just because she was the victim of a crime doesn't mean that she can do whatever she wants.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

There isn't necessarily a "good" reason for the gag order. It's part and parcel of the law for dealing with young offenders.

KitFox

You don't know that.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Well, it is here in Ontario, for example.

MetaEd

16:35

Still, if she felt there was a clear danger to the community and there wasn't time to appeal ... in that case I don't see anything wrong with her flouting the judge's order and taking the consequences, but then in that case why would she say it was her right.

KitFox

It could be that the boys involved didn't actually assault her.

It could be that there is insufficient evidence to establish that they were doing anything other than a really stupid prank.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox Um, that prank was an assault.

KitFox

Was it? There were pictures, but she doesn't remember it.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

> boys pleaded guilty on June 26 to first-degree sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism.

KitFox

Maybe the boys staged some photos, thinking it would be really funny.

And they agreed to the plea because they were in deep shit.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

16:37

You don't really believe that.

MetaEd

Then they shouldn't have pleaded guilty.

KitFox

All I'm saying is that there are a hell of a lot of reasons why a judge might have ordered her to not talk about the case.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I simply fail to see how the victim can be restrained in her first-amendment rights this way. Especially in the US where the constitution is practically a religion.

KitFox

Because there is probably more to it than her first-amendment rights.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox More to it? It's a fundamental right!

Mahnax

16:39

Good evening, folks.

KitFox

What about the attackers? Some boys who did something really stupid, or maybe something that just appears really stupid, and the judge didn't want them marked for life because of it?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox That's the rationale, yes, but, so what? It isn't a fundamental right that says "You get to have a do-over"

KitFox

So what?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

So just because the judge feels bad for person A doesn't mean he gets to trample all over person B, who I might add, is the actual victim here.

KitFox

We don't know any of the details here. What if the pictures are of her partially clad and the boys with their dicks in their hands laughing and pointing?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

16:42

what about the "first degree sexual assault" part?

KitFox

And she's some psycho narcissistic bitch who wanted to get back at her ex-boyfriend or something?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Sexual abuse, not assault.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox what is the difference?

KitFox

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 That means touching, not violating.

And sometimes not even touching.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox "touching, not violating?" please.

KitFox

> He or she subjects another person to sexual contact who is incapable of consent

No penetration.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

16:45

penetration isn't required for it to be assault.

user19161

@Mahnax Hi!

KitFox

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Yes, it is.

Mahnax

Oop, gotta go. Break's over.

KitFox

> A person is guilty of first degree sexual assault if he or she engages in sexual penetration with another person (etc)

user19161

@Mahnax Bye!

MetaEd

16:46

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 You might be thinking of simple assault. Plus the definition will vary from state to state.

KitFox

And it might be different in Canada.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@MetaEd yeah, I think this is it. the definition varies. The point is, even if they didn't actually insert their penises into her, she was still assaulted.

I just don't see how it makes sense for the law to say "you can't tell anyone who hit you"

KitFox

Well, I disagree.

MetaEd

In Kentucky, where the prosecution occurred, the crime ("sexual abuse in the first degree") is defined here: lrc.ky.gov/KRS/510-00/110.PDF

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

or "groped" or whatever verb you want to use

KitFox

16:48

"Who took pictures of you while you were passed out and placed their penis prominently in the foreground."

MetaEd

Probably the relevant text is: "A person is guilty of sexual abuse in the first degree when: [...] He or she subjects another person to sexual contact who is incapable of consent because he or she: [...] Is physically helpless".

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox THAT would be the OTHER thing they were charged with

KitFox

I'm sure that would account for first-degree sexual abuse if the angles were right.

And anyway, they might be total fuckers, but they still have rights.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox it doesn't matter. it doesn't even matter what the crime was.

If the crime is not that big a deal, nobody will care if she talks about it.

If the crime was a big deal, then it's even worse that she is prevented from talking about it.

Why do their rights supersede hers?

KitFox

That's not the point. The point is that she was specifically told not to talk about it, and she specifically did the thing that she was told not to do.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

16:51

And you think that's ok, and within the grounds of the free speech laws in your country?

KitFox

Without knowing more details, yes.

I believe a judge would not do that lightly.

And anyway, I'm sure the judge will only fine her for contempt.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Well, for example, it's mandatory in Ontario: all young offender cases have gag orders about posting the offender names.

KitFox

The jail sentence is just for headline hoopla.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 So you think the victims should be able to broadcast that information?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox yes

KitFox

What if it turns out that the offenders were innocent?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

16:54

Then they can sue for slander/libel

just like anyone else

KitFox

Not if the alleged victim simply names them as the person who is charged with raping them.

That's not slander. It's true.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

fine, it's true, so what?

it's also "they were charged".

KitFox

So now that person's name has been dragged through the mud when it wouldn't have been otherwise.

user19161

Oh, another debate. I won't get involved...

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

People's names can be dragged through the mud all the time.

KitFox

16:57

Not minors.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

That doesn't mean that free speech should be suppressed.

KitFox

shrugs

She did something she was told not to do. Now she's upset about being punished for it.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Why are minors special?

KitFox

Because the law allows for indiscretion of youth.

Matt Эллен

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 because children change more than adults

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

16:58

They're only special in that if they do something WRONG we allow them to, essentially, start over at 18.

KitFox

Juvenile records are sealed.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Exactly. But we can't do that if someone is making that record public.

And not if they do something wrong, if they are accused of doing something wrong.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

But these people pled guilty.

KitFox

Because they did something dumb and the evidence supported conviction.

user19161

@KitFox Looks like you, hehe!

KitFox

Maybe it was something really awful, maybe it wasn't; maybe they didn't think they could convince a jury that they had only staged the photos.

There are plenty of reasons to plead guilty even when you are innocent.

Especially if you think that your record will be sealed when you turn 18, so it won't count against you when you are seeking employment.

And the girl is pretty intent on them getting what they deserve.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

17:05

I still don't think it makes sense to prevent the victim of an assault (of any kind) from naming their attacker.

KitFox

Well, anyway, she's getting lots of attention. I'm sure if she has a leg to stand on, some famous lawyer will swoop in and do some pro bono work for her.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Maybe it does and maybe it doesn't. It depends on the details of the case.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox I don't see why it would depend on the details of the case. If the "assault" is trivial, nobody will care, and if it's serious, all the more reason for her to have the right to talk about it. And if she's lying, well, we can't stop people from lying but there are laws for dealing with that.

KitFox

It's not like this is the only case ever to have a gag order.

Maybe it was for her benefit, so that the records of her propositioning the boys and her sexual exploits would not be made public.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox come on, even if that WERE true, I think everyone has the right to dig their own hole if that's what they want.

KitFox

Or so that the boys wouldn't name her as the cheap drunk lay who busted them.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

17:09

@KitFox Oh, I'm totally in favour of a gag order preventing the attacker from naming the victim. that's completely different.

KitFox

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 You can't have a one-way gag order. It applies to all parties.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

of course you can have gag orders that don't apply to everyone. For example, that judge's gag order doesn't apply to me, since I'm nut under his jurisdiction. etc.

KitFox

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 You are not a party.

Matt Эллен

at*

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

No, the gag order typically applies to the whole courtroom. usually the proceedings are open.

KitFox

17:12

It applies to the lawyers and the parties involved in the case.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I'm sure it applies to the court officials, the spectators, reporters, everyone.

KitFox

The point is, you can't make a gag order binding for just one party.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox why not?

KitFox

Because you can't.

You can't tell one side not to talk about the case, but let the other side say whatever they want.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Sure you can. You impose a gag order on these 23 people here and not on this 24th person there.

You totally can

KitFox

17:14

You don't know what you are talking about.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox please explain to me why a gag order must affect all parties equally.

KitFox

Because the point of a gag order is to prevent or reduce publicity surrounding a case to reduce public bias.

It always applies to both defendants and plaintiffs.

Otherwise, you have effectively court-mandated public bias toward one side or the other.

I will ask my father-in-law about it.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox court-mandated bias? Naming the victim can further victimize the victim. So it makes sense that the convict is not allowed to name the victim. But preventing the victim from naming the attacker, or naming themselves, is not in the same league. If the victim wants to out themselves, fine! go for it.

KitFox

Naming the accused can victimize the accused. So what?

If the victim wants to say "I was the victim of a crime!" she can do that.

That's not what the issue is here.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

What would be the point of putting a gag on the attacker other than to prevent them from naming the victim?

KitFox

17:21

If you only allow one side to tell their story, then that's all that the public will hear.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 She drove me to it, here are the emails she sent me with naked pictures, she begged me for it, she called me all the time, etc.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox If that happened, then fine, go ahead.

KitFox

And that biases the public against the victim. Is that fair?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

although sending out the naked pictures is probably a violation of child porn laws, so, no.

@KitFox Well, I did say that the attackers should be gagged...

to protect the victim

KitFox

But you can't gag the attackers without gagging the victim.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

yes you can

KitFox

17:24

No you can't.

Legally, you can't.

A gag order applies to both parties.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

"legally", legally, this gag order was legal, but I did start out by saying that I didn't think it should be.

KitFox

So she violated the law and they didn't. She thinks she is justified because she was the victim of a different crime.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

There are lots of tools out there for dealing with "reputation damage control", eg, the slander/libel laws.

KitFox

Those only apply if it is not true.

Instead, the boys don't get to tell their side of the story and she looks like a heroine.

She gets to tell everyone her side of the story.

And inflames the public in her favor without regard for the truth.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@KitFox well, if it's not true, they can sue her.

KitFox

17:27

I'm sure we'd hear all about it.

If they could, since they might not be able to sue her if they can't disclose how they know she is lying.

Since they can't discuss the details of the case.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I'm sure they could get the gag order vacated on whatever relevant details they needed in order to prove that what she's saying isn't true. Except that if they had any details like that they wouldn't have pled guilty in the first place.

Meysam

mellamokb, Illinois

19k 2 12 34

c# mysql php sql asp.net java javascript

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

If what she's saying isnt' true, then I'm much more concerned about the problem of two boys getting sex crimes on their record for something they didn't do.

Meysam

Go play Towers of Hanoi in there

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Meysam it doesn't work for me

KitFox

17:33

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Maybe, maybe not. And they might have plead guilty because they didn't think they could convince a jury they were innocent.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Which is nothing to worry about so long as they are minors, since their records will be sealed.

Except now their names have been published as sex offenders.

And that won't be sealed.

And is searchable on the Internetz.

By prospective employers.

But she's going to have a lot of attention from her misfortune, and I'm sure it will end up benefiting her in the long run.

So in the end, it balances out.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Unless she gets you as her perspective employer, and you tick off the box that says "does not follow rules" :p

MetaEd

It strikes me that it could be common to order silence during the period of time before sentencing, and also fair: the charges and pleas might change, even new facts might come to light.

There's really nothing in the news stories to indicate whether the Judge's orders were for the time being or forever.

@Cerberus Do you think so? Or were you quoting someone else?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@MetaEd It's my understanding that it's "forever" in cases like this. That's how it is here in Ontario, for ALL young offenders cases.

anyway, I'm overdue for lunch. ttyl

MetaEd

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 "In cases like this" doesn't really tell us what happened, only what might have happened.

KitFox

As I said, it is hard to say without knowing more details.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Actually, I would probably tick off "attention seeking narcissist."

Maybe "drama queen," but that's probably too harsh. She's just a teenager.

@MetaEd I don't think the charges or pleas can change in this time, but public perception could change the sentencing.

Matt Эллен

17:49

If I copy my limericks from here to my tumblr, do I have to give attribution?

KitFox

If they are yours, I don't think so.

But I don't know.

Does SE own chat content?

Matt Эллен

no but I've apparently agreed to this:

> In the event that You post or otherwise use Subscriber Content outside of the Network or Services, whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others, You agree that You will follow the attribution rules of the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike license as follows

so, that's a yes

KitFox

Blah. Icky.

I've violated that rule so often, I should be accused of sexual assault in the first degree.

Matt Эллен

:D

user19161

@KitFox Do they own anything? Can't we reproduce our own stuff?

KitFox

18:01

Well, maybe. I don't know, I haven't looked.

Matt Эллен

@JasperLoy no, they don't own it, but once we contribute stuff here, it becomes licensed under the creative commons share-alike attribution licence

user19161

@MattЭллен So does that mean we have to say this was posted on SE by me?

KitFox

Matt's citation seems to indicate that you can't reproduce your content without attribution.

Matt Эллен

so if we use it elsewhere we have to attribute back to the source

@JasperLoy yes

user19161

@MattЭллен But the source is our mind...

KitFox

18:02

That's going to be problematic for my "hiya"s.

Matt Эллен

lol

user19161

Geezis. I think this is so silly...

Matt Эллен

yes, I think legal systems allow for resonable behaviour

like, my limericks counts, but saying hello doesn't

user19161

There are also many stupid laws in this world...

KitFox

I suppose if I don't use the "hiya"s from here, I'm all set.

Matt Эллен

18:03

and I think they're mostly worried about questions and answers

chat's probably not on their minds

user19161

@KitFox I used many periods in this chat.

KitFox

Well, you could always say you posted them on Tumblr first.

You can alter timestamps, right?

Robusto

3

Q: Capitalization of software terms--design pattern

I'm editing a software blog, and the author is describing a design pattern called the "abstract factory pattern." He capitalizes the 'A' and the 'F' in some places and not in others. The Wikipedia article is guilty of doing the same thing, and other software blogs are not proving to be reliable ...

proper-nouns

What, again? Voting to close as OT.

user19161

Actually, I posted them in my mind first.

Matt Эллен

I don't know how, but I could probably seduce the owner of tumblr or something

user19161

18:05

@MattЭллен Depends on his sex and orientation.

Matt Эллен

on the other hand, attribution is really easy

KitFox

Speaking of which...

0

Q: A word for changing shape/size?

For an assignment this term I have to come up with an anti-cliché superhero. I am going to do a superhero that changes shape from thin to big and was wondering if anyone knew a word for this change of shape/size.

single-word-requests verbs nouns adjectives

I answered, but I suppose this is off topic.

2

A: A word for changing shape/size?

It sounds like you want a synonym for horizontal expansion (like puff or pop) more than you want a word for shapeshifting, since your superhero's morph abilities seem pretty specific and limited. In any case, an anti-cliché superhero ought to have an anti-cliché name. How about Mister McPuffins?...

Matt Эллен

I was gonna say Not constructive

KitFox

Just because there really ought to be a superhero named Mister McPuffins.

Matt Эллен

but I gave you +1 anyway

user19161

18:07

@Robusto I'm OK with the question actually.

KitFox

@MattЭллен Thanks.

Matt Эллен

yes, for that reason

user19161

@KitFox I'm also OK with this question.

KitFox

It's a SWR, and pretty narrow. I'm on the fence about it.

Robusto

@JasperLoy YMMV

KitFox

18:09

Is there a word for changing from thin to big?

How about fattening up?

Robusto

It's a programming naming-convention question, not an ELU question. The following case is disallowed per the faq:

> Naming, including naming programming variables/classes

So it doesn't really matter if you are OK with it. A certain consistency is expected. Otherwise ELU becomes the Wild West — or, heaven forfend, The Incomprehensible Room.

KitFox

I disagree, @Robusto. The asker wants to know if it is a proper name or not.

Robusto

Get off my lawn.

KitFox

shakes fist

The one I linked to is far more off topic.

user19161

Get off my laundry.

KitFox

18:15

Mister McPuffins—his tumescence is swell!

Matt Эллен

0_0

KitFox

Anyway, I see he is not actually asking for a name, although that is what he's getting.

Matt Эллен

@Robusto I don't like the question, it sounds like a peeve

KitFox

Now that I have read the question again.

Matt Эллен

Yeah, it's a SWR for a word that means "going from thin to fat"

KitFox

18:16

3

Q: flight connection, airlink, or connecting flight?

If you want to know if there are flights from airport A to airport B, what do you ask? -Are there flight connections between airport A and B? -Are there airlinks between airport A and B? -Are there connecting flights between airport A and B? What is the best word?

single-word-requests nouns

0

Q: flight connections

When do you use the word flight connections? In Google results, it mostly describe the process of 'landing at airport A - connecting flights to B' Can you also use this word to describe all (direct) flights from or to a specific airport? for example: 'flight connections Rome' >> means all fli...

single-word-requests nouns

What's this?

And is that Nortonn again?

user19161

@KitFox We need to ask the Nortonn expert simchona.

KitFox

@sim

Matt Эллен

I'd say so. I'm saying it's a dupe

simchona

You rang?

@KitFox I don't think it's Nortonn. The second question had been part of the first

There are, also, no similar questions as far as I can tell on usingEnglish or EnglishForums

KitFox

OK, thanks.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

18:39

@MattЭллен I don't think the SE user agreement can prevent you from making copies of your own work.

Matt Эллен

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 no, but it does say I need to give attribution if I put it somewhere else

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@MattЭллен I mean, I don't see how they can hold you to that.

In my understanding, their only tool is copyright law, which already would let you make copies of your own work without SE attribution

Matt Эллен

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 because it's in the agreement - just hte same as they hold people who don't create the content to it

waiwai933

@MattЭллен Attribution is only if you use someone else's content. The CC license isn't exclusive, so you can relicense your content to any other site as you want.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@MattЭллен Nah, it's copyright law that holds the others to that agreement.

Of course IANAL. And they could kick you off the site for rule violations.

Matt Эллен

18:46

@waiwai933 OK, but that's not what the user agreement says.

waiwai933

@MattЭллен Sure it is. TOS specifies attribution in accordance with CC-BY-SA, and CC-BY-SA is non-exclusive, so you can relicense as you wish.

Matt Эллен

57 mins ago, by Matt Эллен

> In the event that You post or otherwise use Subscriber Content outside of the Network or Services, whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others, You agree that You will follow the attribution rules of the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike license as follows

so if I repost my stuff elsewhere I have to follow the rules

at least according to the agreement

I'm not sayng a court would uphold it

waiwai933

@MattЭллен No, because the CC license is nonexclusive. It's your content. The TOS is only specifying the terms of the attribution. Since you have the right to relicense, that clause only applies if you theoretically use the content under the CC license, but since you're not, you can relicense under other terms.

Matt Эллен

@waiwai933 that's not what it says

if they don't mean you have to give attribution, they should say that

waiwai933

@MattЭллен Ok, so the quote you posted specifies "the attribution rules of the [CC-BY-SA] license". The CC-BY-SA license says

> Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual (for the duration of the applicable copyright) license to exercise the rights in the Work as stated below:

Non-exclusive = right to relicense.

Matt Эллен

18:53

@waiwai933 right, but then why make me follow the re-attribution rules?

for content I created

waiwai933

@MattЭллен They're not. CC-BY-SA says you don't have to if it's your content.

Matt Эллен

@waiwai933 that's what it says

it says if I repost content I created I have to give attribution.

why would the word You be in there otherwise?

KitFox

Matt Эллен

that doesn't make sense

KitFox

I think it is funny.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

18:55

> You will follow the attribution rules

That doesn't, technically, say "You will make attribution"

Matt Эллен

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 > whether such Subscriber Content was created by You or others

waiwai933

in accordance with the rules of the CC-BY-SA license, which means you don't have to. The word "You" is in there if you're using your own content under the CC-BY-SA license, but you're not.

You could if you wanted to, but you don't have to.

KitFox

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 ...or be absorbed!

Gigili

@KitFox OK, but why you don't say hello to me?

Matt Эллен

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 what else does it mean then? since the attribution rules are all about making attribution

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

18:56

So the rules of CC-BY-SA don't say that you have to attribute your own work

KitFox

@Gigili Hullo! I didn't see you there. I was looking the other way just then.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@MattЭллен I agree that it is confusing, and I'm not sure why they worded it that way, but I can't see how they could possibly expect to prevent you from exercising full copyright over your own work, given that they are relying on copyright law and CC-BY-SA

Matt Эллен

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 but those are not the attribution rule to which they are refering, they are refering to the ones that they have in the user agreement

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

And I'd say that even if that WAS their intent, the agreement technically doesn't say "you have to make attribution", it says "you have to follow the attribution rules of CC-BY-SA", and CC-BY-SA doesn't say you have to make attribution for your own work

waiwai933

@MattЭллен Those specify the terms of the attribution. CC-BY-SA says that if you're attributing under their rules, SE (in this case) has the right to specify terms of attribution.

Transcript for

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…