this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
83 points (95.6% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35822 readers
834 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I have old Facebook and Twitter accounts, maybe some others. I'm old so there's a MySpace account out there. But I've mostly been using reddit the last decade or so, and have migrated to Lemmy. Now, Lemmy is the only social media i use. Recent news got me thinking about this question.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Don't give anything. It can disqualify you, but this is no different than asking your grandma for her diary before they let her sit a jury.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Maybe if that anonymous account has something relevant about it so you can protect yourself from potentially getting screwed over legally.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Thanks for the participation everyone!

My conclusion is that the question is moot. You most likely won't be asked to give up your entire social media activity. But you can be asked about the content if it's relevant to the case.

Perjury is serious beyond the penalties, and i solemnly swear that i had no intentions of doing so.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago

No.

Tired of the constant erosion of civil liberties. This ain't civilization

[–] [email protected] 36 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Nobody was being asked for their social media credentials, it's not like you have to give them full access. What happened was that the attorneys looked the jurors up and went through their old posts, all stuff that was publicly available. One of the jurors they dismissed posted a picture of people celebrating Biden's election win, and that was enough to show that they were biased.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

and that was enough to show that they were biased.

no, it was enough to show that they MAY be biased. The juror in question thought the event was in celebration of caregivers.

not sure if you're deliberately distorting the truth or just uninformed but either way... classy.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago

Can't you just politely decline and then they relieve you from duty? Or can they coerce you into doing a digital striptease for them?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago (1 children)

How would that be enforced?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If the court asks you to provide it and you don't, you can go in jail pretty much indefinitely under contempt of court.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

please post a precedent for this, citation requested.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Sure thing.

Under Rule 37 of the FRCP, a deponent's failure to answer can also be treated as contempt of court. Direct contempt of court is punishable without trial.

Punitive contempt of court actions serve as a punishment and can include a jail sentence of up to 6 months

Remedial contempt of court actions place the individual into jail until such time as they agree to remedy a situation

A 73-year-old Philadelphia lawyer walked out of prison July 10, 2009 after serving 14 years for contempt of court -- the longest term ever served for contempt.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago
[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

What if you are a heavy social media user, and the person on trial is a heavy social media user? Should they not get a jury of their peers?

[–] [email protected] 49 points 7 months ago (4 children)

What exactly is the legal definition of "social media" anyway?

Personally I don't consider lemmy or reddit to be social media, they're more like several forums in a trench-coat.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

I can't wait to give them my Nintendo credentials and cry as they question me about my 1500 hours on Splatoon 💀

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

They are by definition social media...

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago

Yeah, that term has gotten overly broad. I like to separate it into two groups. Personal social media, where you use your real name and stuff, and (for lack of a better term) anonymous social media, where you just use some screen name. If anything you post a comment in is social media most news sites are social media. The term needs to be reigned in and I think should only apply to the personal variety.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I'd say they are because I think I'm getting addicted to Lemmy. It's a habitual task in my free time now.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Lemmy 100% replaced reddit for me . Glad I found something where if it starts getting shitty, I can move to a new instance and stay on the same service.

I hope switching instances is more streamlined in the future.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Going by that logic benzodiazepines are social media

[–] [email protected] -2 points 7 months ago

I was kinda making a light hearted joke but if you want to go by the formal definition, Lemmy is still considered social media

Social media:

Interactive forms of media that allow users to interact with and publish to each other, generally by means of the Internet.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Disclaimer: Not a US citizen, but I think the reporting threshold is similar.

So, I recently applied for a bunch of US work visas as part of my job. C1/D, B1, and B2 to be precise. (Mostly to get my TWIC for easy port entry, honestly). And part of the process involved listing my social media accounts.

I don't use my Facebook anymore, and my lemmy (and then reddit) account isn't really significant. Beyond those, the only one with my name on it is my LinkedIn, which does in fact hilight an aspect of my job that shows why the above mentioned visas would be useful for me. So I ended up only listing my linkedin.

Visas approved. I don't think anyone cares hard enough to actually check unless your name is Daddy Al-Baddy

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago

need more explanation?

load more comments
view more: next ›