I agree with everything you have said here. I have experience of people being cyber bullied and when they are advised to stop using the sites upon which they are bullied, their response is: "No". I simply don't understand this at all.

Perfectly sensible comment IMO.

Risk increases with exposure, simple as that.

It was my internet name what finally got me captured for doing in them brasses at that farm in Coquitlem.

Everything you said in your previous post heaped blame upon the bullied for allowing themselves to be put in a position (through oversharing on social media) to be bullied in the first place. Since you ask for specifics, how about "The ones that choose to give all their details out to everyone, have issues with cyber bullying. Those that don't, don't have any such issues." So far as I'm aware from the extensive media coverage, the unfortunate Ms Parsons was not renowned for the salacious detail she shared on Facebook. It was what other people posted about her that was so hurtful.

If a teenaged child is to operate in a social world dominated by technology and social media, then suggesting that they simply not use social media sites is rather naive. If their genuine friends are arranging to hang out at the mall, or go drink beer in the woods, or even set up a homework study session, they'll likely do so via whatever is the social media site in vogue at the time - whether that's snapchat, twitter, instagram or whatever is the flavour of this week. To prevent a bullied kid from using those sites because that's also where the bullies hang out, is to drive the child further into social isolation and likely increase the possibilty of, erm, negative psychological outcomes.

As a parent of teenagers, I am only too aware that they are way ahead of me when it comes to social media (I've never heard of Yik Yak Schnooks?) and am constantly warning them about putting too much of themselves out there, but I don't think even if you are being bullied it's as simple as staying away from the sites. In my day it may have been toilet walls rather than Internet sites, but not reading it didn't mean it wasn't there, with everyone else reading it.

Sorry, not getting the references, too busy checking for leather trim on my jumper collection.

Well, I have personal and professional experience of this, and I have also had conferences with numerous child psychologists (primarily through my occupation but also when a child very close to me experienced such issues), all of whom have suggested refraining from using such sites or, if they "have" to be used, to tighten their security settings so as to ensure that only those they wish to contact are able to do so. Of course, I accept that you may believe that I should defer to your greater expertise

The bullying element of the risk one takes is, of course, an unfortunate consequences of social media, but it is a risk that is known.

I suspect that bullying has existed as long as humans have existed, and it will continue to exist.

Out of interest, what advice would you give to one of your children caught in such a situation?

It seems it is quite a normal thing to happen - the more people I speak to about it the more this similar scenario pops up and the surprising thing (to me at least) is that the people doing the running to employers/family members/priests() are people you would never dream of doing such a thing. I don't understand what they get out of it - I guess it must be a weird thrill.

PS - nice to see you back ;0)

It's easier said than done however. These days even the video games (console and handheld) are networked and some aspects of the game require social access. You have some element of control, but it's a fine line between social exclusion and social safety. And that's assuming you can keep up with the various share settings in the first place!

That's easy, just teach your kids not be a dweeb or a wanker.

In my industry it is in my opinion the most valuable resource of information.

It can help you ascertain pieces of an organisation chart and contacts (plus communication) method to infiltrate the organisation.

If you don't have a LinkedIn account then you are out of touch with modern business to business sales techniques.

Plus it gives discounts at Hooters.

If it wasn't for Hooters updates on Facebook I wouldn't know what was going on in the world.

I was going to put a thingy on this, but it's a curate's egg for me.

As you may have picked up from the tone of my responses, this discussion has touched a nerve. I, too, have experience of a child close to me (not my own) victimised online. It is a very difficult situation to manage. Of course they should be encouraged (and guided as necessary) to tighten security settings, and limit their friends/contacts/buddies to only people they know well and trust. But, as Teaandtoday pointed out a handful of posts back, that does not stop the comments being made, it merely prevents direct exposure to them. It is (or was, in the case I'm familiar with) less than half the battle, as the "real world" gossip is driven by online posts, regardless of whether the victims themselves read the online content.

I don't know what advice I would give to my own children. Only one of them is old enough to have a significant online presence, and we have tried as much as we can to balance trust with oversight. That child doesn't do "general" social media such as facebook or instagram, and has agreed that we have a mirror of two email accounts on devices managed by parents. But there's a lot of peer pressure to allow collaborative online gaming, for example, which I am very wary of. Sharing a gaming session with one or two chosen friends on a console is one thing; something as public as joining a group on Clash of Clans, with its public and private messageboards, is something else entirely.

I obviously bow to your greater knowledge and professional experience in matters of law, but your comments up-thread came across as somewhat imperious and more than a little simplistic. It is of course a very complicated and emotional subject, but I think I've said my piece and will withdraw from this one now.

I apologise for touching a nerve. That wasn't my intent at all and I can't disagree with anything you have just posted.

I don't believe my expertise in law has any real bearing on this particular subject and, again, I apologise if I came across as imperious.