The other day, an entertainer in a variety show, said,
"People who speak ill of people, on anonymous SNS, will be spoken ill by them"
I can understand that the feelings of the entertainer painfully, and I think that I want it to be true as well from my bottom of my heart.
However, his opinion is incorrect.
Because the essential of "anonymous SNS" is anonymity
The system guarantees "bad mouth" securely, irresponsibly, unilaterally 100% , without identity
The system is no risk perfectly, since it is made in such a way.
"You can say bad things unlimitedly"
-----
In the past, a person who criticized were required to be responsible for the remarks of their criticisms.
If you criticize, you must have identified as a critics absolutely.
So, basically "people who lack the ability to explain logically" did not publish their criticism to the world - or they could not.
However, with the advent of anonymous SNS, anyone can say what they want freely, conceptually, intuitively, short-circuited, ignorantly.
-----
Whether this is "wonderful" depends on the qualities (characteristics) of that person.
Of course, paradise would be realized for "people lacking the ability to explain logically."
The world where you can speak ill of people without permission is to provide a place of great stress relief.
And for the side who exposes identity and provides content, it is the emergence of unreasonable hell that is no more.
And this system will shrink people (especially young people) who try to disclose their contents.
The system will break a creator's minds and destroy their talents.
(I've seen a lot of such cases).
-----
Using anonymity SNS, means, I think,
"they have an intention to use the system that guarantees "bad mouth" securely, irresponsibly, unilaterally 100% , without identity
to the world".
-----
Again,
"People who speak ill of people, on as anonymous SNS, will be spoken ill by them"
will not be established.
Because, anonymous SNS is the system that breaks people minds, in a one-sided bad mouth.