You know what's going to be law? Having to post your real name on public forums.

[Darsithis]

You're literally proving my point. Emotional distress must have a corresponding monetary value or equivalent remediation, it never exists as an independent charge. If you can't prove the emotional distress hurt your monetary prospects, then you wouldn't have a civil court case.

That's not true. You can prove and win a civil court case solely on the basis of emotional distress even if it didn't inflict a financial harm on you. Obviously most of the time it does - time off of work or even losing a job - but it is not a requirement.

[PC2]

Literally everything both you and I have linked states the opposite is true.

Then you are ignorant regarding how the law works, particularly you don't understand civil law.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not true. You can prove and win a civil court case solely on the basis of emotional distress even if it didn't inflict a financial harm on you. Obviously most of the time it does - time off of work or even losing a job - but it is not a requirement.

I was talking about emotional distress. Did you have a precedent source?

[Endus]

That's not true. You can prove and win a civil court case solely on the basis of emotional distress even if it didn't inflict a financial harm on you. Obviously most of the time it does - time off of work or even losing a job - but it is not a requirement.

The important part is why those financial harms get claimed, too; if they exist, you may as well tack them onto the suit.

- - - Updated - - -

Then you are ignorant regarding how the law works, particularly you don't understand civil law.

I don't know how I can make it more clear than by linking a specific tort that makes no reference whatsoever to physical or financial harms, which I've already done, and you've ignored for no reason you've yet presented.

You've given no evidence to back your assertions, and the one case you did provide concretely and definitively contradicts you on this.

[cubby]

Not at all. Emotional distress does not magically convert into financial awards, it is based on damage to a persons financial prospects.

That is entirely incorrect. Emotional distress can be factored into almost any portion of the compensatory damages brought to bear by a jury. And you're incorrectly using compensatory damages. A jury award is compensatory based - the two factors being actual and punitive.

[PC2]

I don't know how I can make it more clear than by linking a specific tort that makes no reference whatsoever to physical or financial harms, which I've already done, and you've ignored for no reason you've yet presented.

What was the specific case?

[Endus]

What was the specific case?

Use the one you linked, which explicitly confirms all this, as I've already pointed out. But you're again using words incorrectly, here.

[PC2]

Use the one you linked, which explicitly confirms all this, as I've already pointed out. But you're again using words incorrectly, here.

The one I linked was based on financial damage compensation from emotional distress.

[PC2]

You really don't remember what you're arguing? You're claiming every case is based on financial damage compensation based on financial damage. Emotional distress doesn't count on its own...

I'm saying the idea of a emotional distress case that is not based on financial damages makes zero sense in civil law. In criminal law it could make sense to take someone to court for emotional distress to punish them, but you wouldn't get any compensation.

[Belize]

Wonder how many lists I'm on

Probably a lot. Say hi to the FBI!

[Medusa Cascade]

Probably a lot. Say hi to the FBI!

Hi FBI!
Though I'm outside their jurisdiction

[Heladys]

we should also have access to people's blood types and whether or not they're organ donors too.

A negative, and yes I am. Why?

[Orlong]

I think this will become a law one day, and sooner than later. I think it's time people have the shit they type in forums be associated with their real names. Free speech is there, it is just that you are accountable now. Thoughts?

You can go first. Im sure your real name isnt Grogo. While youre at it you should use a real picture of you for your avatar as well

[PC2]

financial compensation. It's not financial damages.

Wrong, they are one and the same. However much you have been damaged thats how much compensation you get. Punitive is the one that is not based on financial damages, that is the only thing that distinguishes them.

[Deleted]

im not sure if thats a common name or not, but if it is common its not too bad having people know it, but i have a unique surname so googling my name brings up stuff only about me

you cant barely get a more Swedish name than Staffan Jönsson haha

also, when i google my name, i pop up too.

"Google is your freind" right?

anyway, as soon you step in to a forum, you are on google.

[Deletedaccount1]

I think this will become a law one day, and sooner than later. I think it's time people have the shit they type in forums be associated with their real names. Free speech is there, it is just that you are accountable now. Thoughts?

How is this a public forum?
How will this apply to every jurisdiction?
Why would this need to happen?
What would stop someone from lying?

[Deleted]

you cant barely get a more Swedish name than Staffan Jönsson haha

also, when i google my name, i pop up too.

"Google is your freind" right?

anyway, as soon you step in to a forum, you are on google.

when i google the name you posted, it comes up with a lot of linkdin and other social media accounts, if i had the time to sit through and look at them, could maybe find something, whereas, if you google my name, there are about 10 results, it comes up with a new article about my primary school, my address on the 2nd result from 192.com and a few other things where my name is mentioned, so you can be the laziest stalker in the world and have no issue finding me, so i'd rather not have to use my real name on a forum, at least using peggleftw provides some privacy :P

[Laerrus]

No thanks. I don't want some nutcase tracking me down, breaking down my door and shooting me or my family because I hurt his/her little feelings.

Time for people to grow a thick skin. The anonymous nature of the Internet is fine the way it is.

[Deleted]

No thanks. I don't want some nutcase tracking me down, breaking down my door and shooting me or my family because I hurt his/her little feelings.

Time for people to grow a thick skin. The anonymous nature of the Internet is fine the way it is.

also the amount of doxxing that already happens for upset feelings is already bad enough imo.

[Deleted]

when i google the name you posted, it comes up with a lot of linkdin and other social media accounts, if i had the time to sit through and look at them, could maybe find something, whereas, if you google my name, there are about 10 results, it comes up with a new article about my primary school, my address on the 2nd result from 192.com and a few other things where my name is mentioned, so you can be the laziest stalker in the world and have no issue finding me, so i'd rather not have to use my real name on a forum, at least using peggleftw provides some privacy :P

well, if a random dude can find your adress like that, and personal information (Address is kinda personal, isnt it?) its too much indeed

but again, what if, everybody on a open forum has to use their names, it would be a big chanse that somebody got our names

somewhere out there anyway haha

y'know what i mean

But for me, i got no enemies or anything like that, and got nothing to hide. so for me, its okay to use my name. but i know what you mean, if you have a unique surname or whatever, it can be a little tough

[Kujako]

also the amount of doxxing that already happens for upset feelings is already bad enough imo.

I stopped using the official Blizzard forums when they threatened to expose where I live to you maniacs (granted they rescinded the threat later on).