BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 18 Feb 09 - 03:55 AM

Apologies Michealr I misunderstood your post. That was a bit cheeky of me.
Thought you were taking the pee out of my comments!

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: michaelr
Date: 17 Feb 09 - 07:01 PM

...so I'm told. They don't want to be lumped in with this Glenn scumbag.

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: Wesley S
Date: 17 Feb 09 - 03:56 PM

wyrdolafr - were any laws violated? It sounds like all of the information that was published was - as far as the internet is concerned - public information. As far as the punk kid who abused his cat. I can't find any sympathy for him. And now he'll know that there are consequences for his actions. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

We all need to realize that anytime we post something on the internet - and yes - that includes the Mudcat - that the effects can be far reaching. For better or worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 17 Feb 09 - 03:29 PM

Are they Michaelr? Sorry, I must have missed your placard..

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: michaelr
Date: 17 Feb 09 - 03:24 PM

Cocksuckers everywhere are protesting...!

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 17 Feb 09 - 03:04 PM

Bollox, I posted that, when I meant to edit it. Eh oh...

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 17 Feb 09 - 03:03 PM

I'd prefer to separate the emotive issue of a little cocksucker beating his cat, from the potential dangers of the kind of 'virtual vigilantism' which his actions 'incurred.'

I think what is dangerous, is that the retribution does gratify one instinctively. That's the first reaction. So groups like this, can appeal to 'the common man' who is fucked off at his own shit lot/genereal shit in the world, in that they appear to be rebelling against a flaccid and corrupt establishment, by fighting the good fight on our behalf. There is a drama and romance in this. Illustrated by plenty of stories and pop myths.

But what's the truth behind the motivation of any vigilante? A frustrated worker for good, who cut's to the chase and does what needs to be done? Or someone who gets a gratifying buzz out of using the 'moral highground' in outing the 'bad guy' or 'supporting the underdog', to legitimise their own repressed sadistic dominator drives?

I do not know what woud motivate someone to become involved in 'arbitrary' causes, unless they had a pretty dodgey impulse to cause grief or weild some kind of power over others, which was supported by some exceedingly loose ethical appeals to 'justice'.

In short, there are a lot of furry animals out there being abused every day, by all kinds of cocksuckers. I don't believe retribution of the kind this group brought about will aid the causes of any of these creatures. And I do suspect the possibel hidden power junkie motives of any form of non-personal or at least non-cause based vigelantism.

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: robomatic
Date: 17 Feb 09 - 02:33 PM

People have posted some pretty unattractive things on youtube, which are perfectly legal. F'r instance snake feeding times, the thing is the posters usually know they're gonna reap some upset messages and respond "Hey, it's just nature taking place when I leave my bunnies in the same room as my constricter."
The posters get off on the outrage.

Slamming around the cat in my opinion he got what he deserved. But if he'd fed it to the constrictor he'd've been covered.

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: Rapparee
Date: 17 Feb 09 - 11:47 AM

An awful lot of teenagers are videotaping and posting themselves planning and even committing crimes. From the Columbine killings to the stabbing death of a 16-year-old girl here in Pocatello, I can't think of any good reason for it other than the mythical "15 minutes of fame."

It's as if they WANT to get caught -- and perhaps they do.

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 01:36 PM

Ebbie wrote: "Another person perpetuating the video... Unbelievable".

The reason the video was 'perpetuated' was that if Glenn was solely responsible for pulling the video - it's not clear whether YouTube pulled it or whether it was Glenn himself covering his tracks - it wouldn't be forgotten or 'brushed under the carpet'. The idea was to draw attention to what he did.

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 01:12 PM

Some thoughts here.

A teenager who not only "punches his cat and slams it into the wall" but films himself doing it is a danger to everyone around him; I shudder to think what he may be like in years to come, when he will have more power over his life.

There are laws against animal abuse. I hope that is followed up.

YouTube was correct in taking down the video and rescinding his account. I should think they too could be liable.

Another person perpetuating the video... Unbelievable.

Subject: RE: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: meself
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 12:48 PM

When your local branch of the Hell's Angels delivers toys to kids in the hospital, does it change your opinion of them?

Did the (untrue) story about the Mafia putting out a contract on the guys who raped a nun change your opionion of them?


(Having asked those questions, I must state that I had never heard of these particular internet groups, and so far have formed no opinion of them whatever).

Subject: BS: Kenny Glenn & internet vigilantism
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 16 Feb 09 - 06:23 AM

If you're easily upset by tales of animal abuse, I'd read the rest of this with caution


I doubt the likes of 'Anon' and /b/ will that well known to many (if) any of you, but they've garnered a reputation in the media and on the internet regarding taking on and demonstrating Scientologists as well as harassing individuals over the last few years. Sometimes there's a serious or specific reason behind it, but other times it's a bit arbitrary and uncalled for.

Anyway, over the weekend two short videos appeared on YouTube of teenager (Kenny Glenn) beating his pet cat Dusty - punching it and slamming it into tiled bathroom walls. Luckily, the cat lived but obviously the treatment it received was abhorrent.

The videos were seen and linked to on /b/ - which is an image-based internet message board and a furore broke out. /b/ is often described as the 'internet hate machine' and I think most people on here would find the contents uncomfortable, to put it politely, but the videos hit a nerve. Glenn and/or YouTube deleted the videos and suspended his account, but the videos were mirrored by '/b/tards' (posters on the /b/ message board) and the story was purposely spread to other sites and message books so the story wouldn't go away.

In very quick time, they'd linked Kenny Glenn to various other on-line accounts - practically everything connected to him that was on-line - his home address in Oklahoma, phone numbers, his school details, his father's place of work and contact details and so on.

Some almost CSI-style detective work was involved in this, comparing background elements in photographs from his Facebook account to things in the background of the YouTube videos as well as 'less than legal' computer-related activities.

The police were contacted and the information that have been gathered passed on was passed on to them. Dusty is now at a vets whilst the D.A. is meeting with lawyers for the Glenn family on Tuesday.

So, was this a 'good thing' or a 'bad thing'? Much of this involved the same group of 'anons' that have targeted Scientology over the last 12 months or so. If you were aware of those activities, has the retribution for Dusty changed your mind at all? For better or worse? Are they (still) internet bullies? Are you worried that these kinds of groups can exist who can very easily fall on either side of the moral fence? Should they have got involved at all?