• In case most of you have not noticed, I made changes to the donation amounts as well as the durations for all of the paid membership levels. Things are winding down here, and this seems to be the most prudent way to deal with the "end of life" period of this site.

    Contributor level members - $10 per 30 days
    Sponsors - Eliminated
    Benefactor level members - $25 per 30 days
    Endowment level members - $50 per 30 days

    Account Upgrades Page
  • Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

NY Senate bill seeks to end anonymous internet posting

AbsoluteApril

AbsoluteApril

mighty blue justice
Joined
Feb 6, 2002
Messages
7,592
Reaction score
687
Points
113
Age
50
Location
Washington, USA
I added the bolded part, the story is from: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technol...end-anonymous-internet-posting-162549128.html


"Anonymity is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the United States was founded, in part, thanks to Thomas Paine's anonymously written, pro-revolution pamphlet Common Sense. On the other hand, 12-year-olds who post anonymously on the internet can be rather unpleasant and cause real problems by cyberbullying. Whether you think the good outweighs the bad, this news is troubling indeed: A far-reaching bill introduced in the New York State Senate could end the practice of posting online once and for all.

Introduced by New York State Sen. Thomas F. O'Mara (R—Big Flats), S6779 would require that any anonymous post online is subject to removal if the poster refuses to post — and verify — their legal name, their IP address, and their home address. From the (likely well intentioned) bill:

"A web site administrator upon request shall remove any comments posted on his or her web site by an anonymous poster unless such anonymous poster agrees to attach his or her name to the post and confirms that his or her IP address, legal name, and home address are accurate. All web site administrators shall have a contact number or e-mail address posted for such removal requests, clearly visible in any sections where comments are posted."

Critics are quick to point out how dangerous and ineffective the anti-privacy bill would be in the off chance that it somehow passes. After all, IP addresses do nothing to verify a person's identity, and including your home address on a controversial internet post could open you up to real-life threats.

In effect, the bill is an online stalker's dream. Of course, the most likely result of the bill's passage would just be the full-scale elimination of all comment systems everywhere, because the system is an unworkable burden on both the poster and the "web site administrators" who would need to respond to ludicrous take down requests at all times of the day."
 
Who will be doing the requesting of the site administrator?

I've got some news for those New York legislators: "You don't have ANY jurisdiction outside of your state lines." So how would they enforce something like this? :rolleyes: And as for the IP addresses, HAH, good luck with that one. There are MANY ISPs out there that use dynamic allocation of IP addresses that would make that information totally useless to gather. And guess what? If they aren't physically located within New York state, they don't have any jurisdiction over them neither.

My guess is that the actual crux of legislation of this nature is to harass particular websites that are considered to be a pain in the butt to government on several levels. Probably from unflattering anonymous posts made against such legislators.. Make a stupid law that is impossible to enforce, yet put the site administrator in legal jeopardy, regardless, and in some instances the site would just go away rather than fight an expense legal battle. That, my guess, is what this is really about.
 
Amazing these politicians who have not the slightest idea always trying to ban, limit or change every stinking aspect of our lives. Screw them, I say.
 
Just goes to show you that they have no understanding of how the internet works yet seek to regulate it under the guise of "protecting" children. They tried to turn SOPA into an anti-child porn bill after it got the smack down by Anonymous, IT professionals, and other groups. This seems to be made from the same cloth. I bet most of these politicians don't even know how to use the finer functions of the Microsoft Office Suite, yet they think they understand enough about how computers work to be able to regulate it? Absurd. Leave IT to the IT gurus, keep your filthy noses out of it.
 
Back
Top