No to clarify I didnt say make it illegal, I said to de-anonymize it. If you are gonna say controversial things they just have to be tied to your name.

▲

mqus 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

This just does not work and it has been tested in practice. I can't link studies right now, but as a simple example: How many of these horrible things were said by publicly known people (e.g. politicians, celebrities,...) and there were little to no actual consequences?

▲

squigz 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I fail to see how that makes it any less prone to abuse. And I don't see how it would help things. People say horrible shit all the time in person too.

▲

sumeruchat 2 days ago | parent [-]

The assumptions is that most people that say horrible things online are cowards and would not say it in person.

	▲	frm88 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If you deanonymise, you'll have to do it on a general basis. This would include investigative journalists, whistleblowers, protesters etc. Surely you can see the net-negative we'll get from that.
	▲	squigz 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		An assumption I disagree with wholeheartedly. People say and do even more heinous shit in person all the time. You yourself said your locals have become more aggressive. Do you think that if we were like, "Hey, if you wanna continue to talk shit, you have to tell us your name" they'll just be like "oh okay you know what you're right I was wrong I love minorities" or do you think they'll just become even more aggressive? Do you think that'll lead to more understanding between people? Or just more violence against minorities?