I think we are missing a point here, I am not completely convinced that spouting ones vitriolic racist ugly bitter comments has anything to do with human intelligence. A lot of the comments I see on Australian Yahoo are devoid of any intelligence, they are nasty white supremacy type comments that expose the lack of any internal brake and probably demonstrate bad character in the posters. I have real trouble believing that the providing the ability to call someone a slanty eyed stinking Indian pig anonymously is a guarantee of democracy, I think that the ugliness comes out because it is allowed to come out - and often those commenters are very cowardly people. That is not courage to stand by ones convictions. By all means, exercise your democratic right to voice whatever ugliness lurks in your soul, but then also stand by what may come at you. Opinion and debate is something completely different than inciting hatred and sometimes, riots. Talk about an angry mob, I have seen instances where an online posse of nutcases incited some really ugly things.
I think there are a few different discussions here. One is about democracy. The other is about addressing behaviors. Do you really think the folks who are given carte blanche by the ability to be anonymous, and some take many different persona to incite drama, would do so if they knew they could be made responsible? It is about moral compass, and it appears to get lost all the time.
That is not democracy, that is childish behavior and school ground bullying. The flipside of that is that you take it on the chin. But many of the anonymous hate spouters don't like to be exposed for what they are. Ugly.
Keep Up with TechRepublic