I don't understand this new law... Who determines what's offensive, and to what extent the offence is punishable by prison or X amount of money. Because, this works both ways... maybe I'm terribly offended at this HN thread... and maybe I want reparations beyond the ones the mods can offer, I want to see wood_spirit locked up about it... and you know, maybe, maybe I am truly that offended, I just need to push it hard enough for someone in Scotland to pick it up.
They're really going all-in with this 2+2=5 stuff, aren't they? And not just Scotland, but all over the place. Seems pretty coordinated.
Sure, we'll just get around to that as soon as we have the time to care for a self publicising narcissist.
Wait, I think Elon is ahead of you in the queue!
Surely this thread has no purpose apart from flamebait?
Some reporting has indeed the motivation to inform people that might want to have a critical position on laws like these. When does it pose flamebait and when does it not?
Very similar question about how it can or can not be determined whether a statement is motivated by hate or not.
Do J.K. Rowling's anti-transgender comments meet the standard of "stirring up hatred"?
Some of the type of men she was talking about seem to think so. One of them, Katie Neeves, was on BBC Radio 4 earlier ranting on about JK Rowling's tweets, insisting that the police should intervene, while also, quite bizarrely, going on a tangent to defend stealing his sister's underwear when he was a teenager.