what happens to the bully? what happens when they receive more hate mail than they can open? what happens when their identity is stolen because of the information they were told to give up? what happens when the victim decides that since the bully is only 4 hours away by car that they will drive to their house and do something to them. Not everyone who is picked on in forums and the like is going to simply take it sitting down and turn the other cheek. So what happens then? or do we chalk it up to a lesson learned?
hypotheticals can be brought up all day long to discuss this topic but in the end, the law will not reach its stated course without leaving trouble in its wake.
you keep talking about fear being the motivator for people who are against this ridiculous proposal...how about common sense? how about looking at past history when people's real information is available on servers (see BoA hack, Wells Fargo hack, PSN hack, etc) the biggest companies in the world are trying to keep this information private and they cannot...are you telling me that AMT is going to have better security than BoA? come on...this is an idea that could be launched with the best intentions, and could possible deter some mean internet posts...but the wake that will be left by it is the very definition of the phrase "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"
To me it is about control, but even if I cede the point that it was an honorable attempt, it is still a dangerous over-reaching failure... I realize no one will get you off of your crusade, but don't you think there is the SLIGHTEST chance that the information gathered when a law like this is invoked could be compromised?
I guess I just ask myself whats worse?...what is the easiest solution?...this isn't even close...
do you not believe that this could be a privacy issue?
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
This is a public service announcement
With guitar
Know your rights all three of them
Number 1
You have the right not to be killed
Murder is a CRIME!
Unless it was done by a
Policeman or aristocrat
Know your rights
And Number 2
You have the right to food money
Providing of course you
Don't mind a little
Investigation, humiliation
And if you cross your fingers
Rehabilitation
Know your rights
These are your rights
Wang
Know these rights
Number 3
You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it.
Know your rights
These are your rights
All three of 'em
It has been suggested
In some quarters that this is not enough!
Well..............................
Get off the streets
Get off the streets
Run
You don't have a home to go to
Smush
Finally then I will read you your rights
You have the right to remain silent
You are warned that anything you say
Can and will be taken down
And used as evidence against you
what happens to the bully? what happens when they receive more hate mail than they can open? what happens when their identity is stolen because of the information they were told to give up? what happens when the victim decides that since the bully is only 4 hours away by car that they will drive to their house and do something to them. Not everyone who is picked on in forums and the like is going to simply take it sitting down and turn the other cheek. So what happens then? or do we chalk it up to a lesson learned?
hypotheticals can be brought up all day long to discuss this topic but in the end, the law will not reach its stated course without leaving trouble in its wake.
you keep talking about fear being the motivator for people who are against this ridiculous proposal...how about common sense? how about looking at past history when people's real information is available on servers (see BoA hack, Wells Fargo hack, PSN hack, etc) the biggest companies in the world are trying to keep this information private and they cannot...are you telling me that AMT is going to have better security than BoA? come on...this is an idea that could be launched with the best intentions, and could possible deter some mean internet posts...but the wake that will be left by it is the very definition of the phrase "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"
To me it is about control, but even if I cede the point that it was an honorable attempt, it is still a dangerous over-reaching failure... I realize no one will get you off of your crusade, but don't you think there is the SLIGHTEST chance that the information gathered when a law like this is invoked could be compromised?
I guess I just ask myself whats worse?...what is the easiest solution?...this isn't even close...
do you not believe that this could be a privacy issue?
The bully can choose not to give their info out and the post is deleted.
The administrator can decide also what is considered bullying as ours do.
what happens to the bully? what happens when they receive more hate mail than they can open? what happens when their identity is stolen because of the information they were told to give up? what happens when the victim decides that since the bully is only 4 hours away by car that they will drive to their house and do something to them. Not everyone who is picked on in forums and the like is going to simply take it sitting down and turn the other cheek. So what happens then? or do we chalk it up to a lesson learned?
hypotheticals can be brought up all day long to discuss this topic but in the end, the law will not reach its stated course without leaving trouble in its wake.
you keep talking about fear being the motivator for people who are against this ridiculous proposal...how about common sense? how about looking at past history when people's real information is available on servers (see BoA hack, Wells Fargo hack, PSN hack, etc) the biggest companies in the world are trying to keep this information private and they cannot...are you telling me that AMT is going to have better security than BoA? come on...this is an idea that could be launched with the best intentions, and could possible deter some mean internet posts...but the wake that will be left by it is the very definition of the phrase "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"
To me it is about control, but even if I cede the point that it was an honorable attempt, it is still a dangerous over-reaching failure... I realize no one will get you off of your crusade, but don't you think there is the SLIGHTEST chance that the information gathered when a law like this is invoked could be compromised?
I guess I just ask myself whats worse?...what is the easiest solution?...this isn't even close...
do you not believe that this could be a privacy issue?
The bully can choose not to give their info out and the post is deleted.
The administrator can decide also what is considered bullying as ours do.
Common sense to me is to not be a cyber bully
that doesn't answer the question
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
This is a public service announcement
With guitar
Know your rights all three of them
Number 1
You have the right not to be killed
Murder is a CRIME!
Unless it was done by a
Policeman or aristocrat
Know your rights
And Number 2
You have the right to food money
Providing of course you
Don't mind a little
Investigation, humiliation
And if you cross your fingers
Rehabilitation
Know your rights
These are your rights
Wang
Know these rights
Number 3
You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it.
Know your rights
These are your rights
All three of 'em
It has been suggested
In some quarters that this is not enough!
Well..............................
Get off the streets
Get off the streets
Run
You don't have a home to go to
Smush
Finally then I will read you your rights
You have the right to remain silent
You are warned that anything you say
Can and will be taken down
And used as evidence against you
This is a public service announcement
With guitar
Know your rights all three of them
Number 1
You have the right not to be killed
Murder is a CRIME!
Unless it was done by a
Policeman or aristocrat
Know your rights
And Number 2
You have the right to food money
Providing of course you
Don't mind a little
Investigation, humiliation
And if you cross your fingers
Rehabilitation
Know your rights
These are your rights
Wang
Know these rights
Number 3
You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it.
Know your rights
These are your rights
All three of 'em
It has been suggested
In some quarters that this is not enough!
Well..............................
Get off the streets
Get off the streets
Run
You don't have a home to go to
Smush
Finally then I will read you your rights
You have the right to remain silent
You are warned that anything you say
Can and will be taken down
And used as evidence against you
I was @ that show, it was goooood. (first few rows middle of eddie and Stone)
Good 'find' jeanwah. Relevant! Lucky Idris. I saw The Clash perform this in London a long, long time ago (84?) - but the band had already 'imploded' by then. Happy I saw them in their early days. Still.. Strummer....
what happens to the bully? what happens when they receive more hate mail than they can open? what happens when their identity is stolen because of the information they were told to give up? what happens when the victim decides that since the bully is only 4 hours away by car that they will drive to their house and do something to them. Not everyone who is picked on in forums and the like is going to simply take it sitting down and turn the other cheek. So what happens then? or do we chalk it up to a lesson learned?
hypotheticals can be brought up all day long to discuss this topic but in the end, the law will not reach its stated course without leaving trouble in its wake.
you keep talking about fear being the motivator for people who are against this ridiculous proposal...how about common sense? how about looking at past history when people's real information is available on servers (see BoA hack, Wells Fargo hack, PSN hack, etc) the biggest companies in the world are trying to keep this information private and they cannot...are you telling me that AMT is going to have better security than BoA? come on...this is an idea that could be launched with the best intentions, and could possible deter some mean internet posts...but the wake that will be left by it is the very definition of the phrase "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"
To me it is about control, but even if I cede the point that it was an honorable attempt, it is still a dangerous over-reaching failure... I realize no one will get you off of your crusade, but don't you think there is the SLIGHTEST chance that the information gathered when a law like this is invoked could be compromised?
I guess I just ask myself whats worse?...what is the easiest solution?...this isn't even close...
do you not believe that this could be a privacy issue?
The bully can choose not to give their info out and the post is deleted.
The administrator can decide also what is considered bullying as ours do.
Common sense to me is to not be a cyber bully
that doesn't answer the question
ok this has been posted ...
"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."
No information is gathered or given to anyone unless the cyber bully volunteers it so no I do not
think it is a privacy situation when one volunteers to post their information.
If a bully victimizes and that victim requests the info from the administrator the bully then needs to give the info or the post comes down.
It is fair situation as it gives some power to the victim to stop the bully or know the bully
And it is up to the bully to decide if they want to share that info or just allow the post
to be deleted.
It is a deterrent to bullying and that is common sense to me.
"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."
No information is gathered or given to anyone unless the cyber bully volunteers it so no I do not
think it is a privacy situation when one volunteers to post their information.
If a bully victimizes and that victim requests the info from the administrator the bully then needs to give the info or the post comes down.
It is fair situation as it gives some power to the victim to stop the bully or know the bully
And it is up to the bully to decide if they want to share that info or just allow the post
to be deleted.
It is a deterrent to bullying and that is common sense to me.
please please please point to where this only applies to bullying?
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
"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."
No information is gathered or given to anyone unless the cyber bully volunteers it so no I do not
think it is a privacy situation when one volunteers to post their information.
If a bully victimizes and that victim requests the info from the administrator the bully then needs to give the info or the post comes down.
It is fair situation as it gives some power to the victim to stop the bully or know the bully
And it is up to the bully to decide if they want to share that info or just allow the post
to be deleted.
It is a deterrent to bullying and that is common sense to me.
please please please point to where this only applies to bullying?
It is a victims bill aimed at cyber bullying.
The upon request is the victim's power to ask the administrator,
which has the final say, as related to posting guidelines for their website,
as to whether or not it is abusive.
At this point the poster with the post in question can decide whether or not to
leave the offensive post up, this defined by said website.
Lawmakers in Albany are promoting a bill to combat cyber-bullying by trying to force anonymous posters off the Web.
Under the proposed “Internet Protection Act,” Web-site administrators would have to provide posters’ contact information. If the victim of an offending post complains, the site would be required to delete it or have the poster reveal his or her identity.
State Sen. Thomas O’Mara (R-Big Flats) introduced the bill earlier this month, calling cyber-bullying “one of the great tragedies of the Internet age.”
He said the legislation would help prevent “anonymous criminals from hiding behind modern technology and using the Internet to bully, defame and harass their victims.” O’Mara cited surveys finding that about 40 percent of students have been victims of cyber-bullying.
Momma always told me... 'Life is like a box of chocolates... you never know what you are going to get and some of those chocolates are filled with some fucking weird shit in them that taste like plastic or rubber or something. So, keep an eye out, Son'.
...
I comment on the entire idea that is expressed. I don't pick out one or two words and create my own context around them. I comment on the idea, based upon the idea... regardless of the person behind the comment. I do not believe in basing my opinions just because i don't like the person making the comment. If I did that, that would make me a fucking asshole, right?
This is why I like people like Cincy, Unsung and Know1. We stand diametrically opposed on many political or religious hot issues, yet I agree with them on others. I respect these posters, even though I completely disagree with some of their opinions. They treat me with respect and counter me on my ideals or messages, not on me, as a person and rarely, if ever, take a word or a sentence out of context. I always felt like they have treated me fairly... even though we have gone around... quite a few times... on some really heated discussions. I like Godfather even though we disagree... A LOT... But, he is kinda funny.
Again... when you step on to A Moving Train... you need to accept the fact that there is going to be heated debate. It does not mean anyone is bullying anyone. They are trying to express a point that others have counter-points. That's it. If you want to talk happy talk... there are other places on this site where you can only find happy thoughts. That is not going to happen in a place where abortion, gun control, religion and politics are discussed. We know that going in.
Maybe... we should take our own fucking advice and use the ignore feature.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Momma always told me... 'Life is like a box of chocolates... you never know what you are going to get and some of those chocolates are filled with some fucking weird shit in them that taste like plastic or rubber or something. So, keep an eye out, Son'.
...
I comment on the entire idea that is expressed. I don't pick out one or two words and create my own context around them. I comment on the idea, based upon the idea... regardless of the person behind the comment. I do not believe in basing my opinions just because i don't like the person making the comment. If I did that, that would make me a fucking asshole, right?
This is why I like people like Cincy, Unsung and Know1. We stand diametrically opposed on many political or religious hot issues, yet I agree with them on others. I respect these posters, even though I completely disagree with some of their opinions. They treat me with respect and counter me on my ideals or messages, not on me, as a person and rarely, if ever, take a word or a sentence out of context. I always felt like they have treated me fairly... even though we have gone around... quite a few times... on some really heated discussions. I like Godfather even though we disagree... A LOT... But, he is kinda funny.
Again... when you step on to A Moving Train... you need to accept the fact that there is going to be heated debate. It does not mean anyone is bullying anyone. They are trying to express a point that others have counter-points. That's it. If you want to talk happy talk... there are other places on this site where you can only find happy thoughts. That is not going to happen in a place where abortion, gun control, religion and politics are discussed. We know that going in.
Maybe... we should take our own fucking advice and use the ignore feature.
Your post has nothing to do with cyber bullying...
please look up the definition, research what people are experiencing,
read about the laws in place and this proposal.
Cyber bullying has nothing to do with debate, MT, innuendo,
or off color remarks. No misinterpretation or misunderstanding.
Our site here has great rules guidelines in place...
this proposal is attempting to initiate that as the rule. This to protect real life victims
who are suffering... real suffering!
It's nothing like 10C members who get pissed at someone while in a debate or not :fp:
Momma always told me... 'Life is like a box of chocolates... you never know what you are going to get and some of those chocolates are filled with some fucking weird shit in them that taste like plastic or rubber or something. So, keep an eye out, Son'.
...
I comment on the entire idea that is expressed. I don't pick out one or two words and create my own context around them. I comment on the idea, based upon the idea... regardless of the person behind the comment. I do not believe in basing my opinions just because i don't like the person making the comment. If I did that, that would make me a fucking asshole, right?
This is why I like people like Cincy, Unsung and Know1. We stand diametrically opposed on many political or religious hot issues, yet I agree with them on others. I respect these posters, even though I completely disagree with some of their opinions. They treat me with respect and counter me on my ideals or messages, not on me, as a person and rarely, if ever, take a word or a sentence out of context. I always felt like they have treated me fairly... even though we have gone around... quite a few times... on some really heated discussions. I like Godfather even though we disagree... A LOT... But, he is kinda funny.
Again... when you step on to A Moving Train... you need to accept the fact that there is going to be heated debate. It does not mean anyone is bullying anyone. They are trying to express a point that others have counter-points. That's it. If you want to talk happy talk... there are other places on this site where you can only find happy thoughts. That is not going to happen in a place where abortion, gun control, religion and politics are discussed. We know that going in.
Maybe... we should take our own fucking advice and use the ignore feature.
Life is like a cup of Koolaid....some drink it, but others know better not to!
I got a different angle on what Cosmo was saying in the 'pansie' line. The point, I think, was that its too hard to determine what precisely is bullying (sometimes). And I think that line suggests that some things said on the internet might be taken in a different context, and a person accused of bullying cant be held liable for another persons misinterpretation of something that was harmless. Kinda like what's going on in this very thread, I think a few people arent on the same page, and interpretation is a grey area.
...
That's pretty much it.
It all depends upon the person's relative perspective. Some people will take anything out of context, wrap it in a light that support their view and complain. And the poor Web admins will be left to figure out what is bullying and what is hyper-sensativity. The law is not going to make that call... the persons left to enforce it will shoulder all of the weight.
Under this law... i could be a pansie fuck and report Pandora to the Admins and say she's being mean and bullying me. Kat and Sea will have to determine whether it is true or not and may rule in my favor and she will either have to remove her post or reveal her address. How is that right? It's not right... it's bullshit.
forcing people to say nice things online will NOT make them nice people in the real world. Reality works the other way around.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I got a different angle on what Cosmo was saying in the 'pansie' line. The point, I think, was that its too hard to determine what precisely is bullying (sometimes). And I think that line suggests that some things said on the internet might be taken in a different context, and a person accused of bullying cant be held liable for another persons misinterpretation of something that was harmless. Kinda like what's going on in this very thread, I think a few people arent on the same page, and interpretation is a grey area.
...
That's pretty much it.
It all depends upon the person's relative perspective. Some people will take anything out of context, wrap it in a light that support their view and complain. And the poor Web admins will be left to figure out what is bullying and what is hyper-sensativity. The law is not going to make that call... the persons left to enforce it will shoulder all of the weight.
Under this law... i could be a pansie fuck and report Pandora to the Admins and say she's being mean and bullying me. Kat and Sea will have to determine whether it is true or not and may rule in my favor and she will either have to remove her post or reveal her address. How is that right? It's not right... it's bullshit.
forcing people to say nice things online will NOT make them nice people in the real world. Reality works the other way around.
That's the crux of this whole thing. Assuming for a moment that the intent of this law is to stop internet bullying (which there seems to be consensus; it's not).....Internet bullying is subjective; based on who-knows-whose morality. I find it pretty telling that the person supporting this does so without even knowing who will make that judgement, or what it will be based on. Just throw your weight behind a law you don't even understand....hope for the best. For those suffering. If it's left to the mods, and you end up on a site with a mod with a bias toward the bully, and against the bullied....what then?
Support for this smacks of purely emotional, knee-jerk, reactionary measures. Which is NEVER the right way to proceed in legal circumstance. But, we've had that discussion before, too.....and the supporter feels that it's ok to base laws on emotions and feelings; facts and consequence be damned. In fact, it's a necessity. For the children. Otherwise, we're abusing them ourselves, right?....
Ya know, the solution towards bullying isn't to create laws against it. The real solution is having a stronger self-esteem, confidence and ability to ignore anyone who gets under your skin.
No one can insult, degrade, bully, or piss you off without your permission.
That's the crux of this whole thing. Assuming for a moment that the intent of this law is to stop internet bullying (which there seems to be consensus; it's not).....Internet bullying is subjective; based on who-knows-whose morality. I find it pretty telling that the person supporting this does so without even knowing who will make that judgement, or what it will be based on. Just throw your weight behind a law you don't even understand....hope for the best. For those suffering. If it's left to the mods, and you end up on a site with a mod with a bias toward the bully, and against the bullied....what then?
Support for this smacks of purely emotional, knee-jerk, reactionary measures. Which is NEVER the right way to proceed in legal circumstance. But, we've had that discussion before, too.....and the supporter feels that it's ok to base laws on emotions and feelings; facts and consequence be damned. In fact, it's a necessity. For the children. Otherwise, we're abusing them ourselves, right?....
I researched further
No it is not subjective... it is guidelines per each individual website
made by the administrators.
This is also who makes the judgment ... is the individual websites administrators ...
like this one.
In fact the proposal is basically like this site is run as far as imposing guidelines.
The reason why people don't think it is about bullying is the OP's article in post 1,
it was the least informative one I found. I found others explaining why the bill was created,
for whom and how it will work.
And that no one gives up any privacy as it is elective to post private info
this happens only if you do not want a post deleted by the administrator
who deemed it offensive after it was reported by the victim.
there are no victims of cyber bullying here by the way that fit the criteria that I have seen,
basically because of our administrators and our rules.
This proposal is asking for the same as a rule and is trying to bring fairness to those
who are being cyber bullied and suffering.... we are not!
Ya know, the solution towards bullying isn't to create laws against it. The real solution is having a stronger self-esteem, confidence and ability to ignore anyone who gets under your skin.
No one can insult, degrade, bully, or piss you off without your permission.
Really? :fp: good grief
Mental cruelty is very real, so real it is grounds for divorce.
Emotional abuse by a parent can remove that child from the household.
Emotional abuse can get a teacher fired.
Emotional abuse is as damaging as physical. Do a little research on cyber bullying,
what the criteria is, what the effects and results are before you dismiss
all those suffering by saying ... chin up
Do you think we have cyber bullies here? Because we do not. We have posting guidelines
to keep them away.
Ya know, the solution towards bullying isn't to create laws against it. The real solution is having a stronger self-esteem, confidence and ability to ignore anyone who gets under your skin.
No one can insult, degrade, bully, or piss you off without your permission.
Really? :fp: good grief
Mental cruelty is very real, so real it is grounds for divorce.
Emotional abuse by a parent can remove that child from the household.
Emotional abuse can get a teacher fired.
Emotional abuse is as damaging as physical. Do a little research on cyber bullying,
what the criteria is, what the effects and results are before you dismiss
all those suffering by saying ... chin up
Do you think we have cyber bullies here? Because we do not. We have posting guidelines
to keep them away.
Like I said, No one can insult, degrade, bully, or piss you off without your permission.
If you have to think about it, fine. But think about this. No one causes the thoughts in one's head. We are the owners of our thoughts and we have the power to change them at any time. No one else is to blame for how we allow ourselves to feel. You don't like bullies? IGNORE THEM. WALK AWAY.
[
That's pretty much it.
It all depends upon the person's relative perspective. Some people will take anything out of context, wrap it in a light that support their view and complain. And the poor Web admins will be left to figure out what is bullying and what is hyper-sensativity. The law is not going to make that call... the persons left to enforce it will shoulder all of the weight.
Under this law... i could be a pansie fuck and report Pandora to the Admins and say she's being mean and bullying me. Kat and Sea will have to determine whether it is true or not and may rule in my favor and she will either have to remove her post or reveal her address. How is that right? It's not right... it's bullshit.
forcing people to say nice things online will NOT make them nice people in the real world. Reality works the other way around.
We have guidelines protecting us here and administrators watching out, this why there are no
cyber bullies here. Our mods do just this, remove the posts and give time out if warranted.
The difference is in the proposal the one offending can choose to leave the post up
but only if they post their information. It is their choice.
Again cyber bullying is not innuendo or off color comments. It is not oh they are being mean
it will be decided by guidelines per site just as we have here.
Comments
what happens to the bully? what happens when they receive more hate mail than they can open? what happens when their identity is stolen because of the information they were told to give up? what happens when the victim decides that since the bully is only 4 hours away by car that they will drive to their house and do something to them. Not everyone who is picked on in forums and the like is going to simply take it sitting down and turn the other cheek. So what happens then? or do we chalk it up to a lesson learned?
hypotheticals can be brought up all day long to discuss this topic but in the end, the law will not reach its stated course without leaving trouble in its wake.
you keep talking about fear being the motivator for people who are against this ridiculous proposal...how about common sense? how about looking at past history when people's real information is available on servers (see BoA hack, Wells Fargo hack, PSN hack, etc) the biggest companies in the world are trying to keep this information private and they cannot...are you telling me that AMT is going to have better security than BoA? come on...this is an idea that could be launched with the best intentions, and could possible deter some mean internet posts...but the wake that will be left by it is the very definition of the phrase "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"
To me it is about control, but even if I cede the point that it was an honorable attempt, it is still a dangerous over-reaching failure... I realize no one will get you off of your crusade, but don't you think there is the SLIGHTEST chance that the information gathered when a law like this is invoked could be compromised?
I guess I just ask myself whats worse?...what is the easiest solution?...this isn't even close...
do you not believe that this could be a privacy issue?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
This is a public service announcement
With guitar
Know your rights all three of them
Number 1
You have the right not to be killed
Murder is a CRIME!
Unless it was done by a
Policeman or aristocrat
Know your rights
And Number 2
You have the right to food money
Providing of course you
Don't mind a little
Investigation, humiliation
And if you cross your fingers
Rehabilitation
Know your rights
These are your rights
Wang
Know these rights
Number 3
You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it.
Know your rights
These are your rights
All three of 'em
It has been suggested
In some quarters that this is not enough!
Well..............................
Get off the streets
Get off the streets
Run
You don't have a home to go to
Smush
Finally then I will read you your rights
You have the right to remain silent
You are warned that anything you say
Can and will be taken down
And used as evidence against you
Listen to this
Run
The administrator can decide also what is considered bullying as ours do.
Common sense to me is to not be a cyber bully
that doesn't answer the question
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
:thumbup: :thumbup:
I was @ that show, it was goooood.
I'll third or fourth that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPeWSpB_7w4
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Good 'find' jeanwah. Relevant! Lucky Idris. I saw The Clash perform this in London a long, long time ago (84?) - but the band had already 'imploded' by then. Happy I saw them in their early days. Still.. Strummer....
Oops.. derailment. Sorry. :oops:
Wow, lucky YOU! (What is your TC number, btw?)
ok this has been posted ...
"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."
No information is gathered or given to anyone unless the cyber bully volunteers it so no I do not
think it is a privacy situation when one volunteers to post their information.
If a bully victimizes and that victim requests the info from the administrator the bully then needs to give the info or the post comes down.
It is fair situation as it gives some power to the victim to stop the bully or know the bully
And it is up to the bully to decide if they want to share that info or just allow the post
to be deleted.
It is a deterrent to bullying and that is common sense to me.
please please please point to where this only applies to bullying?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
It is a victims bill aimed at cyber bullying.
The upon request is the victim's power to ask the administrator,
which has the final say, as related to posting guidelines for their website,
as to whether or not it is abusive.
At this point the poster with the post in question can decide whether or not to
leave the offensive post up, this defined by said website.
Lawmakers in Albany are promoting a bill to combat cyber-bullying by trying to force anonymous posters off the Web.
Under the proposed “Internet Protection Act,” Web-site administrators would have to provide posters’ contact information.
If the victim of an offending post complains, the site would be required to delete it or have the poster reveal his or her identity.
State Sen. Thomas O’Mara (R-Big Flats) introduced the bill earlier this month, calling cyber-bullying “one of the great tragedies of the Internet age.”
He said the legislation would help prevent “anonymous criminals from hiding behind modern technology and using the Internet to bully, defame and harass their victims.” O’Mara cited surveys finding that about 40 percent of students have been victims of cyber-bullying.
Is JOEJOEJOE your real name?????
But I don't think he is going to be a major. General infantry for you, Joe.
in this case it is voluntary to fire up
...
I comment on the entire idea that is expressed. I don't pick out one or two words and create my own context around them. I comment on the idea, based upon the idea... regardless of the person behind the comment. I do not believe in basing my opinions just because i don't like the person making the comment. If I did that, that would make me a fucking asshole, right?
This is why I like people like Cincy, Unsung and Know1. We stand diametrically opposed on many political or religious hot issues, yet I agree with them on others. I respect these posters, even though I completely disagree with some of their opinions. They treat me with respect and counter me on my ideals or messages, not on me, as a person and rarely, if ever, take a word or a sentence out of context. I always felt like they have treated me fairly... even though we have gone around... quite a few times... on some really heated discussions. I like Godfather even though we disagree... A LOT... But, he is kinda funny.
Again... when you step on to A Moving Train... you need to accept the fact that there is going to be heated debate. It does not mean anyone is bullying anyone. They are trying to express a point that others have counter-points. That's it. If you want to talk happy talk... there are other places on this site where you can only find happy thoughts. That is not going to happen in a place where abortion, gun control, religion and politics are discussed. We know that going in.
Maybe... we should take our own fucking advice and use the ignore feature.
Hail, Hail!!!
please look up the definition, research what people are experiencing,
read about the laws in place and this proposal.
Cyber bullying has nothing to do with debate, MT, innuendo,
or off color remarks. No misinterpretation or misunderstanding.
Our site here has great rules guidelines in place...
this proposal is attempting to initiate that as the rule. This to protect real life victims
who are suffering... real suffering!
It's nothing like 10C members who get pissed at someone while in a debate or not :fp:
Ever since they invented that awful action figure, I have been prevented from moving up the ranks!
You'd think I'd make officer just based on having kung-fu grip!
Life is like a cup of Koolaid....some drink it, but others know better not to!
That's pretty much it.
It all depends upon the person's relative perspective. Some people will take anything out of context, wrap it in a light that support their view and complain. And the poor Web admins will be left to figure out what is bullying and what is hyper-sensativity. The law is not going to make that call... the persons left to enforce it will shoulder all of the weight.
Under this law... i could be a pansie fuck and report Pandora to the Admins and say she's being mean and bullying me. Kat and Sea will have to determine whether it is true or not and may rule in my favor and she will either have to remove her post or reveal her address. How is that right? It's not right... it's bullshit.
forcing people to say nice things online will NOT make them nice people in the real world. Reality works the other way around.
Hail, Hail!!!
Support for this smacks of purely emotional, knee-jerk, reactionary measures. Which is NEVER the right way to proceed in legal circumstance. But, we've had that discussion before, too.....and the supporter feels that it's ok to base laws on emotions and feelings; facts and consequence be damned. In fact, it's a necessity. For the children. Otherwise, we're abusing them ourselves, right?....
No one can insult, degrade, bully, or piss you off without your permission.
No it is not subjective... it is guidelines per each individual website
made by the administrators.
This is also who makes the judgment ... is the individual websites administrators ...
like this one.
In fact the proposal is basically like this site is run as far as imposing guidelines.
The reason why people don't think it is about bullying is the OP's article in post 1,
it was the least informative one I found. I found others explaining why the bill was created,
for whom and how it will work.
And that no one gives up any privacy as it is elective to post private info
this happens only if you do not want a post deleted by the administrator
who deemed it offensive after it was reported by the victim.
there are no victims of cyber bullying here by the way that fit the criteria that I have seen,
basically because of our administrators and our rules.
This proposal is asking for the same as a rule and is trying to bring fairness to those
who are being cyber bullied and suffering.... we are not!
Mental cruelty is very real, so real it is grounds for divorce.
Emotional abuse by a parent can remove that child from the household.
Emotional abuse can get a teacher fired.
Emotional abuse is as damaging as physical. Do a little research on cyber bullying,
what the criteria is, what the effects and results are before you dismiss
all those suffering by saying ... chin up
Do you think we have cyber bullies here? Because we do not. We have posting guidelines
to keep them away.
Like I said, No one can insult, degrade, bully, or piss you off without your permission.
If you have to think about it, fine. But think about this. No one causes the thoughts in one's head. We are the owners of our thoughts and we have the power to change them at any time. No one else is to blame for how we allow ourselves to feel. You don't like bullies? IGNORE THEM. WALK AWAY.
We have guidelines protecting us here and administrators watching out, this why there are no
cyber bullies here. Our mods do just this, remove the posts and give time out if warranted.
The difference is in the proposal the one offending can choose to leave the post up
but only if they post their information. It is their choice.
Again cyber bullying is not innuendo or off color comments. It is not oh they are being mean
it will be decided by guidelines per site just as we have here.