New after-work hobby for office workers: being the "Internet Justice Bao"

Guys, let me be completely frank: the internet is getting more and more underwhelming these days.

Celebrity gossip stays trending for only three days before vanishing into thin air;

The fifth unofficial national classic *Divas Hit the Road Season 2* feels brand new no matter how many times you rewatch it, but counting the years, it is already a variety show from a decade ago;

The novel *Early Spring, Clear Sky* went viral, Luke has been on my mind for days, yet he will never step into the real world right in front of me.

Looking across the vast expanse of the internet, the scarcest resource right now is not high-quality content, but the sense of participation that we users lack.

Until that day, I accidentally stumbled into the entrance of cyber judges, clicked the button lightly, and the door to a brand new world swung wide open.

I found out that a lot of young people have long become casual magistrates, the reincarnation of Kogoro Mouri, the reborn Detective Dee, holding court online in every nook and cranny of the internet.

No matter it is a trivial matter or a big event, once it falls into the hands of this generation of cyber judges, it becomes the light of justice shining over the whole land.

From minor takeout disputes to major marriage and relationship issues;

These young people who act as judges on the internet have long pushed the cyber court to full of fun and creativity.

01

The cyber courts on the internet have become a total collection of hilarious jokes

In the past, to find something funny, you had to watch variety comedy shows where judges preach lofty values;

Now, people who really know where the fun is have long gone to cyber courts for entertainment.

As the saying goes, the top priorities in life are eating and drinking.

First to come into our sight is the Meituan Review Panel.

Here comes the classic case: both sides have their own reasonable arguments that are hard to refute.

A customer ordered warm milk tea, and used exaggerated rhetoric saying it was hot enough to scald someone to death;

The merchant refuted, arguing that since the customer was still able to type to leave the comment, they were obviously not scalded to death, trying to use the customer's physical survival fact to defeat the exaggerated literary rhetoric;

Another customer complained that the eggplant with minced meat dish had no meat, the picture did not match the actual product, trying to label the merchant as a liar for false publicity;

The merchant responded confidently: this is a pre-made dish.

This is not even an attempt to prove innocence, this is a voluntary confession.

If these two small takeout court cases are still evenly matched, and we as little judges are still hesitating which side to support, then the next case I would call the signature masterpiece of the Meituan Review Panel, the founding work of the "making trouble out of nothing" school.

The customer casually left a comment that "the rice tastes like rice", which made the merchant and all judges freeze their brains instantly;

At first glance of this sentence I even thought it was a three-line poem: the rice tastes like rice, the rice carries the bent waist of the whole village, mother stands at the door, with unremovable awns of rice stained on her apron.

But the merchant could not sense any poetry at all, they only felt that an enemy was coming for them.

After all, this comment belongs to the same universe of absurd injustice as "the water is too thirst-quenching", "the salt is too salty" and "the sugar is too sweet".

This can even be discussed as a philosophical problem like "a white horse is not a horse" and "cooked rice is not rice".

Some people pick on the fact that rice tastes like rice, others complain that the spicy hot pot dish they ordered did not come with an actual pot.

As a review judge, I can only sigh that there are so many talented people in the track of making trouble out of nothing.

If an academic judge rules on this case, he will definitely list topics such as "Does Buddha Jumps Over the Wall Need a Real Buddha?", "Animal Welfare Issues of Lvdagun Glutinous Rice Rolls", "Marriage Legal Relationship of Wife Cake" and so on.

But if I judge it, I will follow the merchant's logic of "you should put a real wife in the wife cake", and ask him: do you need to put real saliva in the saliva chicken dish?

In the cases above we may still feel one side is a little wronged, but the next case is evenly matched, both sides have strong arguments.

The customer cleverly used personification rhetoric, describing the "hard texture" of the rice to the extreme;

Any review judge seeing this comment will be impressed by how wonderful the language confrontation between the two debaters is, even before figuring out the truth ——

The shopkeeper followed the trend, did not bother to prove his innocence, directly launched personal attacks, hitting the most vulnerable pain point of male psychology.

This is not a bad review at all, this is a debate arena of *U Can U B B*, both sides make moves directly targeting each other's vital points.

As a reviewer on the other side of the internet cable, your fingers hover over the screen for a long time, too hesitant to click to submit your judgment.

When we stay at a hotel, we value comfort very much, but we never expected that the shopkeeper's appearance is now also included in the customer evaluation system.

A customer could not find any flaws in the accommodation, so he suddenly had a whim to attack that the hotel owner is too ugly;

Unreasonable customers not only attack the shopkeeper's appearance, some of them even try to get some money out of the shopkeeper's pocket.

The customer's bad review reason is that the shopkeeper did not follow his note, what was written on that note?

It asked the shopkeeper to give him 200 yuan, and give another 100 yuan to the delivery rider, this is the legendary act of being generous with other people's money.

Where there is a dispute, there are internet judges. In addition to the Meituan Review Panel, they also hang out in the Xianyu Small Court for a long time;

The internet has redefined the meaning of some words, and some ill-intentioned customers were "scammed" out of a little money because of this;

In the small court, a seller posted a listing saying "you can see the fu", implying welfare adult pictures;

The seller kept his word to all customers, the buyer really received a handwritten calligraphy blessing that can be hung on the door;

This is not fraud at all, this is one-on-one assistance for the revival of traditional culture, Chinese culture is really too broad and profound.

We have seen a lot of cases, but this is the first time we have seen a buyer who practically gives a pennant of praise to the seller.

A customer left a bad review for his breakfast order, the reason is that the merchant works from dawn to dusk but still does not raise the price, he thinks this is unacceptable;

The five big words the merchant responded with directly elevated the whole review to a whole new level.

I was almost moved to tears when I saw the five words "Serve the People".

These absurd cases about food and entertainment on the internet are full of irony and unexpected twists, all of them are fierce confrontations hidden in trivial daily stuff, full of love and hate even in a single cup of milk tea.

And what are the judges doing?

They act as two chivalric heroes upholding justice for heaven, and by the way learn some sardonic, sharp internet slang; I thought I just joined a review panel, but I accidentally took a professional training course on the art of quarreling online.

After ruling all the food and drink cases, you think you have seen all kinds of weird things;

But do you think this is the limit of cyber judges? You are too naive.

These trivial food and drink cases are at least based on clear facts and marked prices, at most you get a full refund in the end, and the platform will take responsibility if anything goes wrong.

The real cruel battlefield does not follow any bargaining rules, and all kinds of cyber judges have experienced the full ups and downs of life there.

02

The entire internet has become a public space for people to judge disputes

The cases mentioned above are all review mechanisms built in the platforms, the process at least looks formal, it is like knocking on the gate of the grand judicial court.

But the real wild unofficial cyber court does not even need a gate to exist.

The internet is also full of a large number of posts that say "please netizens judge who is right". No matter it is couple fights, friend fallouts, mother-in-law and daughter-in-law conflicts, or colleague disputes, the parties post the whole story or chat records online, asking electronic judges to distinguish who is loyal and who is treacherous.

To be honest, this generation of netizens is very experienced in doing this.

After all, when we were young, we used to watch shows like *Love Battle*, *Gold Mediation Host*, *Old Uncle and Aunt* all the time, the background sound of a whole generation's childhood is people trying to break up fights.

Other kids learned about friendship and dreams from watching cartoons, we learned from mediation shows who is lying, who is equivocating, who is framing others!

Young cyber judges are no longer satisfied with just eating melon gossip. Just watching is too boring, the point is to step into other people's lives, tear apart the true face of human nature, and see exactly what it is made of.

Reading three Greek tragedies and one Greek comedy is nothing, the real contemporary drama is all laid out on the internet;

And in the public dispute judging space, the most popular theme is always couple quarrels.

As you can see, what catches your eye is a "circuit board" made of massive chat records between netizens and their partners;

The sharp-eyed judges will question why he did not reply to her message on the 322th page of the chat history;

More experienced judges say that once you see the full screen of green chat bubbles, you have already lost the argument.

Money-related transactions such as ordering takeout and whether to send gifts on festivals are also classic cases in the public judging space.

A girl got angry because her boyfriend refused to buy her a cup of coffee;

Some judges felt completely confused thinking this is not a big deal, and advised the girl to be independent in personality;

Other judges see through the