Violentacrez Did It All for ‘Meaningless Internet Points’ on Anderson Cooper

http://betabeat.com/2012/10/violentcrez-admits-he-did-it-all-for-meaningless-internet-points-on-anderson-cooper-360/

by gnarls_manson • 14 years ago

30 69 14 years ago

beedogs2• 14 years ago

At-will employment has its drawbacks.

jgrahamc2• 14 years ago

He may have used those words, but they aren't 'meaningless', they do have value. They represent that some group of people that he considered peers or an audience appreciated what he was doing. And so by having a large amount of karma he felt good, that's not meaningless.

watty3• 14 years ago

I think you're looking too far into the word. In the real world, Reddit points are about as meaningful as how much Farmville cash or crops you have.

Peroni• 14 years ago

I disagree. I'm a mod on a reasonably large subreddit and I regularly get approached about promoting certain brands or blogs. I've never accepted any of the offers as I don't agree with gaming the system but undoubtedly plenty of people have.

Marketeers are getting wise to Reddit. They know if they hit a sweetspot the reddit can make or break their brand over night. Soliciting "reddit celebrities" is naturally going to be a tactic many people employ.

sergiotapia2• 14 years ago

I'm a long time Reddit and mod for a big subreddit - it's not meaningless. There are TONS of perks you get when having a high comment karma count. Physical, actual benefits.

potatolicious• 14 years ago

Useless != meaningless.

Reddit karma is (mostly) useless, but I think the poster's point is that they are meaningful to a great number of people, otherwise they wouldn't be accumulated and fought over with such zeal.

People's egos are tremendously important to them, and the people around them.

weego• 14 years ago

This is where I don't get the duality of how people perceive the internet as a medium.

We want the products we build that aren't (to counter your definition) "in the real world" to give us salary, a future, wealth, whatever... but you flip the viewpoint and someone doing something they wish to do "not in the real world" is completely meaningless (and this implicitly has no value). The fact that people achieve A surely means there are endless scenarios where B is not true.

shanelja2• 14 years ago

I could not agree more, I know from past experience that being part of a group of peers whom you feel value your input can be a very rewarding experience, to say that it is meaningless would be to say that he didn't care at all. They have a meaning, both to him, as what he then felt was a valued individual in the community; and also to me.

It's very easy for people to say that Reddit karma is pointless and has no value to people, but when I look at myself I see myself making comments on another website (http://hackerne.ws) where by, if the other users feel I have made a contribution which added something to the discussion, they reward me by clicking on an up arrow next to my name, it's like they're giving me a virtual thumbs up.

So yes, it made him feel good and it's important to feel appreciated by the audience to whom you perform. Feel free to take away my hard earned karma if you disagree, but bear in mind that it will probably make me die a little inside, at least, for a few minutes, before the rush of internet-adrenaline wears off.

pyre• 14 years ago

Note: hackerne.ws is not owned by ycombinator (IIRC), and probably opens you up to man-in-the-middle attacks against your HN credentials.

CodeCube2• 14 years ago

I've read some comments in other places to the effect of complaining about free speech rights. As I always say, everyone has the right to say/post what they want (within legal boundaries) ... but everyone else is 100% free to react to what you say/post as they see fit. So the fact that he was fired is that freedom being exercised.

watty3• 14 years ago

It all came down to Reddit members and mods protecting a friend and influential person of the Reddit community. It even spilled over to HN where every Gawker article was flagged heavily due to HN affiliation... I'm surprised this one is on the front page.

Permit2• 14 years ago

I can't believe Gawker is still seen as the "Good Guy" by a lot of people on HN. The hypocrisy of Adrian Chen complaining about /r/CreepShots is astounding.

For reference: http://www.gawker.com/upskirt

lmm• 14 years ago

By that logic people in Soviet Russia had free speech rights - the secret police were of course exercising their freedom to react as they saw fit.

mistercow4• 14 years ago

This is actually a really good point, and it's one that a lot of people miss. For Americans, I think the confusion largely comes from the conflation of "the First Amendment" and "freedom of speech". It is correct and valid to say that the First Amendment only applies to the US government. It is incorrect to say that freedom of speech can only be infringed by governments.

The thing is, there's nothing magic about governments. They are just institutions with lots of power. Ideas like "freedom of speech" are meant to level the playing field so that people with little power are able to propose and discuss challenging ideas that can reshape society without being steamrolled by the powerful.

Gawker certainly isn't as powerful as the US government, but they are way more powerful than some guy with a lot of karma on reddit. And if they abuse that power to try to ruin his life, they are stepping on his rights.

For them to do so isn't (and shouldn't be) illegal. But we should express strong disapproval for that behavior.

fab13n2• 14 years ago

Gawker's behavior is shocking, not in terms of free speech, but in terms of journalistic ethics. This story is, in the most literal sense, fabricated news.

The point of the article wasn't that there existed trolls on forums getting a kick out of being as offensive as possible. It can be summed up as "Hi Brutsch, I'm about to try my best to ruin your life, how do you feel about that?". The article was about the article itself (more precisely the previsible consequences of the article's publication). This is trolling, not journalism nor any self-respecting form of news reporting, and the guy who did that stands on no higher moral grounds than Brutsch.

At least Brutsch had no illusion about the value and ethics of what he was doing, wasn't purposefully ruining someone's life, and wasn't making money out of it.

So neither of them likely broke any US law, but the filthiest asshole isn't Brutsch IMO.

mnicole4• 14 years ago

> but the filthiest asshole isn't Brutsch IMO.

Gotta disagree with that. What this kid was doing on a micro-level hurt and affected far more people than Gawker ousting him. Plenty of trolls have been made public before, but outside of the risk of finding a job and the initial backlash, they aren't doomed to lifelong persecution. Whereas his words and actions could have prompted someone to hurt themselves or just cut themselves off from the world.

stoolpigeon2• 14 years ago

"wasn't purposefully ruining someone's life,"

debatable based on the content in some of those subreddits where he was active.

danso• 14 years ago

> At least Brutsch had no illusion about the value and ethics of what he was doing, wasn't purposefully ruining someone's life, and wasn't making money out of it.

What do you mean by "purposefully"? Do you believe that all (or most) of the harm in this world is caused intentionally, by people who deep down in their hearts, think they are doing the wrong, evil thing?

I agree with you that Mr. Brutsch seems like a decent guy overall with just a very eccentric sense of dark humor. But I think you're being naive to think that him just wanting to have old-fashioned trolling fun precludes the possibility that people that he could be hurting people unwittingly. And no matter his intent, he and his activities are fair game for a journalist to expose.

Brutsch claims that to his knowledge, no one has been hurt by his trolling or administering of the content in question. And so we just believe him? This is the same person who, until five days ago, thought he could do this undetected even though he attends real-life Reddit meetups and posted his phone number and complete work history on the Internet, so pardon me if I worry that he may have several blind spots.

raldi5• 14 years ago

Is an Oscar meaningless? Is it meaningless when the team you root for wins a world championship? Or when Time names you Person of the Year?

Why are those considered more meaningful than internet points?

jpdoctor2• 14 years ago

> Is an Oscar meaningless?

Yes.

> Is it meaningless when the team you root for wins a world championship?

Very much yes.

> Or when Time names you Person of the Year?

They already did, and boy was it meaningless.

> Why are those considered more meaningful than internet points?

Some people don't consider them more meaningful.

And if you're the raldi that I think you are: That thing you worked on might have been bigger than you gave it credit for.

raldi5• 14 years ago

What about the respect of your peers? Do you also find that completely meaningless?

eludwig• 14 years ago

"Meaning" is purely subjective idea. Meaning is an intellectual concept that has no physical analog. Things in the physical world don't have meaning. They just are. We, as in our minds, assign meaning to them. The electric current that makes up the Internet is a physical thing. Again, we give it meaning. Arguing about meaning is like arguing about art.

conradfr• 14 years ago

Oscars : attract viewers and make people more "bankable".

Rooting for a sport team : meaningless

Person of the Year : built your credibility, bring recognition etc

raldi5• 14 years ago

You don't think VA's work on reddit attracted viewers, built his credibility or brought him recognition amongst his audience?

calibraxis• 14 years ago

Yes, it's certainly meaningful when the DailyDot's "most important Redditor of the year" is a racist, sexist, pedophile. Says a lot about Reddit that they supported and profited from him (and people like him).

Millennium• 14 years ago

Man, what a thing to risk your life as you know it for.

codva• 14 years ago

"Free Speech" is not relevant to this situation. Free speech rights are limits placed on the government. The only rights you have on Reddit are whatever rights Reddit grants you. And they are free to change those on a whim, or apply them as unfairly as they want.

elliottcarlson• 14 years ago

So many people seem to misunderstand this and what free speech really means.

raldi5• 14 years ago

They're not talking about free speech rights; they're talking about free speech principles.

jerrya• 14 years ago

Free speech is a Human Right: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

The US Constitution describes how that human right is protected in the United States from the US Government.

This doesn't mean that Brutsch did anything right or wrong, it's just a description of how freedom of speech is different and embodied in culture and is not just some form of right given to us by the The First Amendment.

citricsquid• 14 years ago

This post will get removed soon, it seems any posts on this subject are being removed.

mistercow4• 14 years ago

One very helpful side effect, however, was that he exposed Anderson Cooper for the integrity-free yellow journalist he is (at least for those paying close attention).

papsosouid3• 14 years ago

Huh? Did anyone's view of Cooper change over this stuff? I can't imagine anyone who had any respect for him before would change their mind over it, and anyone who would be upset about his "journalism" recently would never have had any respect for him in the first place.

icebraining2• 14 years ago

Well, I had no idea who is was, now I do. So I guess it still has exposed it to some.

mistercow4• 14 years ago

Yeah, my view of him changed. I used to think he was a relatively benign centrist pundit, and I didn't have very strong opinions about him. That changed.

nicholassmith3• 14 years ago

"Mr. Brutsch, who was fired from his job following Gawker’s expose, is now soliciting programming work in the porn industry."

I don't know the porn industry all that well, but it does seem slightly unlikely they'd want someone with a history of pre-18 sexualisation on the team given how hard they have to fight to stay legal.

jgrahamc2• 14 years ago

The porn industry is very well aware of the age of its performers. Pretty much any porn company will point you to its 18 USC Section 2257 record keeping (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257). As a random example, on the front page of the site www.bangbus.com there's the following text:

"All girls appearing on this website are 18 years or older. Click here for records required pursuant to 18 U.S.C 22557 Statement."

And that click here leads to http://help.bangbrosonline.com/2257.php

nicholassmith3• 14 years ago

Oh I know that side of it, but given that they have to be careful to stick within the legal framework I'd be interested how many would take the risk with a guy who's been accused of teenager sexualisation on a large scale on the internet. I'm sure a few won't care of course, he didn't break any laws after all.

xutopia• 14 years ago

I did a bit of work in porn for a while back (when I was young and needed the money).

In one of the description of a video the editor wrote "was 17 just a day ago" to "barely 17" making the mistake to not change the number as he changed it. The forums blew up, complaints started pouring in and it was one heck of a day. The description was online for 20 minutes at most and complaints continued to trickle in for a few days after.

That being said some porn distributors wouldn't mind hiring the guy since his name would most likely not appear anywhere. It really depends on how good he is... and if he's on reddit all day long that's probably not a good thing either.

antihero• 14 years ago

It's not free speech, he was enabling stealing girls' pictures and posting for the internet to wank over. Free speech would be speaking out to advocate that, but actually doing that? We don't have complete freedom of action, and quite rightly so.

Violentacrez Did It All for ‘Meaningless Internet Points’ on Anderson Cooper

Related Stories