Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier
She lost it for libel... she straight up made things up about someone to discredit / undermine them, it's not something that should really be tolerated under any circumstances. There's a huge difference between an unpopular / offensive opinion and an outright fabrication... and she got bolder and bolder in what she thought it was "OK to say" until she inevitably crossed that line.
That said; I do agree that it's a ridiculous way to lose so much money. She started to believe that she was untouchable in terms of any real-world consequences for her actions on Twitter, and that makes her an idiot.
As for the campaign... it would be sort of poetic, I suppose, but I suspect the main aim of it is to annoy and rile people up rather than any genuine ambition to help people. At the end of the day it probably doesn't achieve anything much at best, and actively contributes to the downwards spiral at worst. It's not part of a constructive dialogue, just more point scoring, which isn't much better than Hopkins herself.
Also... can it even work? It's not like the house has been seized by the bank, is it? She's selling it herself so she can surely simply refuse any offers until she gets one from someone who she actually wants to live there  |
That was actually my take-away from their comment. That it's pretty dumb that in all her brilliance, she put so much on the line by a few tweets. Surely she knew libel could be a problem.
I read about the campaign on another site. I'm indifferent on it. It feels like a personal slap at her rather than making any sort of real difference. Surely, if you wanted to make a difference, you wouldn't blow a million on a home when you could use the same $$$ to do a lot more good...
Actually if anything, it may end up helping her if a benefactor steps up to save her from her foreclosure/having to sell? At worst, they're giving her cheap publicity.