Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Actually, if they are harrassing, that is criminal and could be actionable.



> Actually, if they are harrassing, that is criminal and could be actionable.

Often what would normally be criminal harassment is no longer by virtue of being a public figure, to a degree. (Ex: repeatedly calling a campaign office to complain would be kosher, repeatedly calling a personal cell would not)

Imagine if by virtue of running for office your personal cell could be called all hours of the night?

Sometimes I feel we are not critically examining new norms.


> Imagine if by virtue of running for office your personal cell could be called all hours of the night?

If you take constituent calls in the middle of the night directly to your personal cell, just not from specific constituents whose views you don't agree with, then that should be considered inappropriate. If you don't take constituent calls directly to your personal cell and you only take constituent calls during business hours, then you are fine on 1st amendment grounds.


Your post made no real sense to me.


[flagged]


Actually, that helped.

I didn't write my comment to be mean, or anything other than frank.

No, you can't be told to stop writing letters and sending faxes. Once, I was part of a group doing exactly that. 10 a day from each of us over many weeks. At one point they actually put in the newspaper, "tired of hearing about...", to which we continued, "tired of bad policy x

Then we worked to get that person out of office.

And we did.

All just civics. No worries.

None of us would have thought to phone their home, or do those things at their home. The public work was at issue. That person as a normal citizen is like any of us. No worries there too.

If your concern is a personal social media page being used to circumvent law, maybe!

IMHO, the legal test would be whether the content is about thr office, or is actually personal.

Baby photos, high school reunion, new car, cats.... personal. And they could easily make that private. I would. No reason not to really.

I do not see that as an issue at this time. Public figures have plenty of options, and the incentive to make it personal clashes with the need to be public to be reelected, etc...

I shoot add it is definitely unwise to go ahead and run for office using your personal cell phone Facebook accounts as a starting basis.


You didn't do anything wrong and don't have to apologize in response to an uncivil comment that asks if English is your first language. You could reasonably instead have clicked the timestamp on the parent comment and then the "flag" button.


It's not uncivil, in fact it's the opposite - offering to simplify for someone who's having trouble communicating is normal and good.

I can't help it if you have weird notions about not being born in an English speaking country being undesirable or bad.

>I didn't write my comment to be mean, or anything other than frank.

Same, though the parent seems to think anyone who is frank and direct is uncivil. I'm glad the reply helped :)

>I shoot add it is definitely unwise to go ahead and run for office using your personal cell phone Facebook accounts as a starting basis.

My concern is that we're going down a path where we're going to redefine what is fair game in an undesirable way.


Thanks, I know. However, I've a pretty thick skin. Very little actually bothers me.

And I value robust, frank, real conversation. I mostly chuckle, then continue. Often, the whole thing will smooth over and end up somewhere useful.

When it doesn't, it doesn't. No worries.

Each of us has options. How the dialog goes is much more dependent on our use of those options and how we weigh things.

I won't give "is English your first language?" much weight. In most cases, that kind of thing is laughable!

Note, I didn't actually apologize. :D There was no need for anything other than some clarity.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: