"I'd be more inclined to spend a lifetime eating away at shoulda-woulda-coulda." I'm sure I would have done nothing except that: Thought about things I would have said. I would not have called the cops as was done in this case.

I am not suggesting that what the assailant did was right and/or good, but I think the blogging free-speechers of the world mount their high horses, I think it is worth asking questions like: Is it fair to publish material about private individuals? When I blog about private individuals, do I expect the same level of reaction as I would when I write about public officials? Do private individuals have a duty to respond reasonably or rationally? Is what I write about private individuals fair comment? Are there greater risks when writing about private individuals (such as veering into slander/libel)? Am I prepared to live with these risks whether the reaction I get is reasonable or not?

I think it goes to the question of that fuzzy line between journalist, citizen-journalist, blogger and citizen.

Maybe it wasn't a private individual?

I think that is a good point. But each community has a different line between public and private. And manners. PEI has bizzarely heightened formality between elected officials and the public, a freakish hangover in the truest sense of the word from the colonial era. I had little respect for it and made a point of saying "Hi ya" or "how are you now" to the stiff Mr. Binns whenever possible. My point is this: if one has an over inflated sense of one's place and respect due, does one have to honour that when one writes about him?

If it was a public official, I would have named them if I was the blogger. I still don't think I would have called the cops. If other reports I have heard are accurate, the alleged "perp" is a private citizen albeit a well-known (locally) private citizen.

And that, ladies and gentleman, is why I don't blog. You* can't write about someone if there's a risk they're going to read it. As for my reaction, I would imagine it would be a gut one, as when in grade 9 someone pulled the elastics out of my braids and, without thinking, I slapped the offender in the face. She never did it again.
* Ok, <i>I</i>.

I obviously balance that risk by not writing about work, family or anything much about my community. My role as a municipal lawyer, however, is what defines that. But, again, I have that Scottish forhead kiss look about me, too, so that I fear not.

I'm surprised we don't hear more of this kind of thing happening. The anonimity of the net is not absolute (nor should it be IMHO), and folks might do well to ponder the implications of their journalism in that light. Peter is right that violence is not the proper or fair reaction and that it "erodes freedom of expression" for all of us - but that matters less on a personal level when someone is beating on you with a bat.

Ultimately our society has rules to sort out these kinds of things but they should be regarded as a last resort to be relied upon only when preventative guidelines for communal living, such as tact, good judgement and respect, have been tried and failed.

What would I have done? Hard to say without knowing what the original insult was. Call the cops - probably not; I can usually hold my own in the arena of food fights. Call the guy out? Well if I was going to continue posting about him/her - then definitley yes. Otherwise I would probably just suck it up and move on.

I do know what Mr. T would have done though. And I would pity the fool who whacked my java.

What are retardedly long post.

Not at all. We are all enriched.

Calling the cops would depend on where the coffee landed, I suppose. But, it would also give some credibility to naming the person, which I would: this idiot attacked me, the cops have been called.

I mean, really: resorting to violence because of <i>words</i>? Sheesh.

My own inflated sense of myself notwithstanding, if you write something about me on your blog or take a picture of me doing something stupid and then post it on a blog, am I supposed to reasonably respect your right to free speech and fair comment and engage you in a rational debate about the incident? The answer is yes, if I am Mr. Spock. But if you do something like that on your blog, should you factor in the risk that you are going to piss me off plus the risk that, if I am pissed off, I might emotionally or angrily? So when you are going about being a "citizen-journalist" do you have a duty to blog responsibly? How might blogging about someone else's actions hurt them? Is that hurt counter-balanced by my duty to report the news? I guarrantee that other news media ask that question once in a while. Again, I'm not saying what Mr. X did was right, but I am suggesting that the ethics in this case are not exactly black and white.

If a private individual does something stupid in the public realm, is that not fair game?

Yes it is "fair game" in the academic sense. But within the bounds of reality that we should all aspire to live in, consideration for the consequences of our actions should be made before typing away. The law should not, IMHO, always protect people from being asses.

General context of potential ass-ery here and here.

If you do it in a public place <i>or within view of a public place</i>, yes, it's fair game. Few folks realize that if they're dancing naked in their living room with the curtains open and I can see them from the sidewalk, not only am I entitled to watch, but I can take pics as well. The test is the visibility. If you're visible without going to extreme lengths (climbing a tree, etc) or trespassing, then you're in public.

But, as I've told my nine-year-old, the cemeteries are full of people who were right.

Err, peeping tom-sim is still potentially illegal as a breach of the peace or mischief (in the past confusing though more clearly so elsewhere) and such photo taking may be met with consequences.

I beg to differe, Alan: as long as one takes no "extraordinary measures" and doesn't trespass, it's fair game. Photojournalism & the law 101

Yes, public ass-ery is fair game for gawkers. But is not publication of the ass-ery not an extra step? I think the publisher of the ass-ery has to ask the question: Why am I taking the extra step? If the publisher has a good answer then they can go to the next question: What are the consequences of publishing? If the "good" of publishing outweighs the potential consequences then away you go. If the consequences involve an assault, then I guess you go to the police. If it involves spilling a coffee?

With reference to the links Alan makes: Usually, these are dealing with people in the public realm who I think are even fairer game for public comment. But, sometimes those anynomous PEI bloggers name private citizens. Often, it is not because of any ass-ery, it is just because of political association. So what if I do get involved in a political party and some makes me out to be an ass on a blog because of my affiliation with a political party or the manner of my affiliation. What are my recourses against "anonymous" bloggers who sling mud against me? Should I rebut them in some kind of reasoned debate?

<blockquote class="smalltext"> 264. (1) No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.<p>(2) The conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of<blockquote>

(a) repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them;<br>

(b) repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, the other person or anyone known to them;<br>

(c) besetting or watching the dwelling-house, or place where the other person, or anyone known to them, resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or<br>

(d) engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their family.</blockquote></blockquote>Note that 264(2)(c) "watching" does not require repetition.

Any please never refer to anything as "101" when there is a question on discussion again. We are not 13 around here.

Yes, Dad. Ciao.

For the record, Alan, that was the name of the course. Good bye.

You debating manners will get you far, Gordo.

Hanns: hmmm - to rebut, heedbutt or butt out?

My blog is purposely un-anonymous and purposely non-offensive, the filter being what could upset my very (you could say Presbyterian) parents. But, of course, it could upset someone some day. I can't think that an adult who smacks somebody in direct retaliation is doing the right thing, and yeah, call the cops if you are attacked. That is what they are for.

I think the important question overall, as pointed out above, is living your life online: you invite trouble. I try not to say WHAT I am going to do or WHERE, because I don't want to come home to a burgled house.

This is where I could begin rambling.....

I am a cop caller myself but I work with them and and used to the idea that they would consider this well within their jeb description. A name or a license plate noted now in a cop's notebook adds to the story if there is a second occurrance.

I think it's best to simply treat potential blog-fodder as ordinary, decent human beings if you're likely to run across them in your day-to-day activities. They are just <i>homo sapiens</i> like the rest of us, and yet we have the superlative expectation that they will suck it up and not respond as the theoretical Ordinary Joe would. If you're writing about people you see regularly, it's best to keep it tame (or at least civil). I don't have a lot of admiration for Mayor David Miller, for instance. But Dave Miller shops at the same grocery store as I do and it's not unusual to see him there. And he is frackin' <i>huge</i>; he towers over everybody else. So if I feel the need to write about Mayor Miller I am not going to be overly inflammatory.

I have met a lot of public figures, not all of whom I like or admire, but the ability to separate the man from the office is essential. They are ordinary guys on their private time, as are we. That said, if any of them* took a swing at me the only possible response is to leave him (or heaven forbid, her) on the floor with a bloody nose.

*<i>Tie Domi and hockey players of a certain size exempted. I'm not suicidal.</i>

I was mistaken for Mayor Miller by a VIA rail steward. I was even in economy.

I say out the fellow. What would a "real" journalist do? Write a story about being accosted, of course. If this fellow was offended then he should have written a letter to the editor of the local paper, rather than insulting and then assulting the blogger. Furthermore, if he is a public official, then we demand a higher standard of public conduct. He wasn't even adhereing to a low standard.

As for what I would have done, I would have sat there in stunned disbelief, as I think most people would have. It's very hard to be ninja when people so blatantly break social norms - the shock is extremely powerful. Besides which, escalation of those sorts of situations never end well...

The jerk is named.

"public figure" - approriate to mention

If the guy took off, I'd just clean up the mess and make life hard for him via whatever means possible, unless upon reflection I had been teh one that was the primary jerk.. If he got in my face, I'd pop him a few times then claim he swung first when I called the cops.

I'd write it up naming names. The coffee whacker in question sounds like a well known asshat. But I would also go on a little trawl to see what development permits, zoning applications the man had outstanding and I would make it my business to find good, logical, reasons to oppose everyone of them in the most time consuming manner possible. (Were it not for the law of costs, the occasional application for judicial review would not be out of the question.) I would make a point of snapping his picture in public situations - ideally in the happy position of conferring with municipal pols. I would make up an insulting but apt nickname for him and google bomb it.

I might, just for entertainment value, sue him in tort in a Superior Court and conduct a full day's Discovery.

But I would not headbutt him and I doubt I'd call the cops. Mind you, after a month or two of torment, he might headbutt me and call the cops but that would be his problem.