It is remarkable how some people with a history of lost defamation claims seem not only unwilling to change their ways but seem to think they can throw untenable claims of defamation around themselves like snuff at a wake.

It's certainly not supportive of easing defamation law.

Sloppily tagging a completely different person and exposing them in turn to the legion of bat-winged monkey is also not exactly conducive to the notion that defamation or harassment should be eased.

Nicklin J. had an awful lot of robust sense in this at 73-76, with which I agree. However, that robust common sense applies to all, including those who set such bat-winged monkeys on others because of a bruised ego.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2020/3291.html

The point where robust debate, even blunt rudeness or mere vulgar abuse, shade into harassment may, like obscenity, not be one amenable to easy definition; but, like the classic framing of obscenity, you know it when you see it.

There's a fair whack of Irish Twitter seems determined to prove horseshoe theory, and by any yardstick it's a quare progressive platforms Le Pen and Farage.

But, even allowing for the widest parameters of robust debate, you know bullying when you see it.

When you see it, it certainly doesn't make one more amenable to easing the protections afforded against such conduct on some theory of "free speech for me, such consequences as I choose for thee".