I'd love to know the specifics of what it was these guys were arguing about.

Man jailed for 'Web-rage' attack (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/11/17/britain.webrage.reut/index.html)
POSTED: 9:27 a.m. EST, November 17, 2006

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- A British man said to have carried out the country's first "Web rage" attack was jailed for 2-1/2 years on Friday for assaulting a man with whom he had exchanged insults over the Internet.

Paul Gibbons, 47, from south London, admitted he had attacked John Jones in December 2005 after months of exchanging abuse with him via an Internet chat room dedicated to discussing Islam.

London's central criminal court heard that Gibbons had "taken exception" to Jones, 43, after Jones alleged that Gibbons had been "interfering with children."

[More... (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/11/17/britain.webrage.reut/index.html)]



Edit: An earlier story about the incident: Internet user admits 'web-rage' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6059726.stm)

Let's rewrite this a little...
Man jailed for 'Corkboard-rage' attack
POSTED: 9:27 a.m. EST, November 17, 2006

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- A British man said to have carried out the country's first "Corkboard rage" attack was jailed for 2-1/2 years on Friday for assaulting a man with whom he had exchanged insults on a corkboard attached to a wall.

Paul Gibbons, 47, from south London, admitted he had attacked John Jones in December 2005 after months of exchanging abuse with him via notes tacked to a corkboard discussion area dedicated to discussing Islam.

London's central criminal court heard that Gibbons had "taken exception" to Jones, 43, after Jones alleged that Gibbons had been "interfering with children."
Physical violence is assault. The medium through which insults flowed prior to the attack are irrelevant. And I know for a fact that was not the first incident that lead to violence after internet communications. Must have been a slow newspaper day, and a writer with poor research skills.

Yes, it was a poorly written piece.

Intentionally so, I believe.

I am sure that the writer only hoped that the story had a PS3 in it, then it would have been Pulitzer material for him.