Websites Will Be Forced To Identify Trolls

reply to post by boncho


Lmao, governments - trying to troll the interwebs since 1995.

We had someone here in Aus try to pass some legislation way back in '98. Censorship bill. Pretty much still on dialup then, and fancy things like broadband were for big companies only, and peaked at probably 128kbps if you were lucky. Spread that out to hundreds of employees and you were less than dialup.

And this wally wanted to slow it down further while everything was filtered.

Needless to say it got poohpooh'd. I think the old fart died of too many thoughts that pron was still free and he had failed.

Then they tried again... and again... and now we've got the red haired vulture rolling out the National Broadband Network. Because people need to pay $120 a month to download movies and watch youtube at 100mbps. 24mbps is just too old fashioned and soooo 2008.

So I'm guessing there is some hokey pokey going on behind that veil of good will. I'd lay solid plastic money on it.

The worst part about the gubmint trolling so hard, is when they fail, you just bring in the next lot of hooligans to try the same schtick... throw it around enough, one day it might actually hit something...

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


All good questions Tex
All I know is the tactic is "problem reaction solution" resulting a loss to the peeps of something important...

for example:
Back in the day the original boards were bombed with porn spam
the government wanted laws to stop the evil porn spam
the porn spam was tracked back and found to be coming from government computers...

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Seems that way doesn't it. Problem is that the net keeps getting wider.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Haha that reminds me of a guy I used to know on certain forums named Phreex. He used to be found in obscure areas of the internet, say a chat group for mothers and he'd be telling them he's a 13 year old pregnant girl, scared and unsure what to do.

Now no one should be arrested for that... he's dead now anyway, the crusty lipped tweaker... but he was one definite original troll.

It's the idiots that do take it too far and troll a memorial page for someone who's just died.. I still don't think anyone should be arrested or any legislation brought in... but those saddos are really not funny in any way.. but no law will affect a change in their mindless life. they will be idiots in court, in prison, in jail, as much as they are in life...

reply to post by mainidh


You think it is not already? I can think of a couple of things that you can do that will get you a fed visit within a couple of hours. If you are smart and highjack a stranger's wifi that might buy you a few more hours.

Yep the Britished up version of SOPA, yet another infringement of privacy and a tightening of the noose.

With me being of UK origin this one has my nose out of joint....... what can be done though, thoughts ?

there is such a thing as mods
also
the government is spending large on disinfoclowns and trolls can't see them becoming illegal

Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein, Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, outlined a plan for the government to infiltrate conspiracy groups in order to undermine them via postings on chat rooms and social networks, as well as real meetings, according to a recently uncovered article Sunstein wrote for the Journal of Political Philosophy.

As we have often warned, chat rooms, social networks and particularly article comment sections are routinely “gamed” by trolls, many of whom pose as numerous different people in order to create a fake consensus, who attempt to debunk whatever information is being discussed, no matter how credible and well documented. We have seen this on our own websites for years and although some of those individuals were acting of their own accord, a significant number appeared to be working in shifts, routinely posting the same talking points over and over again.

It is a firmly established fact that the military-industrial complex which also owns the corporate media networks in the United States has numerous programs aimed at infiltrating prominent Internet sites and spreading propaganda to counter the truth about the misdeeds of the government and the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

In 2006 CENTCOM, the United States Central Command, announced that a team of employees would be hired to engage “bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information, as well as bloggers who are posting incomplete information,” about the so-called war on terror.

In May 2008, it was revealed that the Pentagon was expanding “Information Operations” on the Internet by setting up fake foreign news websites, designed to look like independent media sources but in reality carrying direct military propaganda

www.prisonplanet.com...

The proposed law in its current format, is unworkable.
1) Who gets to decide if someone is trolling, or serious but misinformed?
2) Websites are... not sentient. They can't be ordered to do anything. They need to change that to the "website owner".
3) Oh dear, the website owner isn't a British citizen, and therefore not subject to this law. "Pretty please Mr. Website owner, tell us who imabigbadtrollandiliveunderabridge is?" "No" "Okay "
4) Oh dear the website is not registered in the UK, and therefore the law can't be applied. Although this would be a bit more difficult to defend if the owner is a British citizen.
5) Website and owner are both British, troll is not, and is protected by privacy legislation of his own country. I see a problem. Owner complies with UK law, and identifies him, and in doing so, breaks the laws of the other country...

This needs to go back to the drawing board.

This is the most ridiculous nonsense I've heard. So If I offend or insult Islam or Combat 18 any lunatic could come to my door with a few lads and give me a going over?

reply to post by JailTales


Would you say those things to them if you was face to face? if not your a coward hiding behind a keyboard.
I only type things I would say to someone face to face.

This is not designed to protect the trolls, many of whom work for that very same government. It's designed to mark as "terrorists" and destroy the lives of anyone who says anything derogatory, abusive, or defamatory of the Power Elite.

Originally posted by daaskapital

Websites Will Be Forced To Identify Trolls

news.sky.com

Websites will be legally obliged to provide victims with the identity of people who post abusive and defamatory online messages about them under plans by the Government.

Glen Oglaza said the reforms have widespread support across the parties, so the Bill should make its progress through Parliament pretty quickly.

The power to ask for anonymous identities to be revealed are intended to give individuals an avenue of redress should they be subject to defamatory comments online.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Great, i wouldn't mind knowing where some trolls live. It would be nice being able to redress someone at their home for being a hateful dick.

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by JailTales

 

Would you say those things to them if you was face to face? if not your a coward hiding behind a keyboard.
I only type things I would say to someone face to face.

Would I tell a group of Combat 18 lads that I think they're the scum of the earth in person? No.

If that makes me a coward then I guess that's what I am.

This thread highlights once again also that nobody has any idea what a troll is.

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

That is what trolling is.

Me comparing Mother Theresa to Hitler is trolling. Should I be arrested for that?

Please learn the internets before posting on them

Hitler is dead so I don't think his feelings would be hurt by that

Is it trolling if a person gives an honest opinion with which you disagree? Should I not be allowed to have that one outlet on the internet where I can say that I do not like what the US Soldier is doing, and actually take pity on their poor little brainwashed souls? I cannot say that in real life, as it would marginlize me in a nation that has gone hyper patriotic since the foam was whipped up in 2001.

I have had people online threaten to find and kill me for saying the above. Mostly because they have kids who are enlisted and deployed, and my statement betrays their own cognitive dissonance in place because of the personal attachment to military deployment that they have. They would consider me hateful, etc....but it is the opposite of hate. I see being a soldier as hateful, honestly, because you go outside our borders looking to take war to other people.

The problem is, what is and is not trolling is perceptive. And the term "troll" is cast about dismissively on political forums in attempts to belittle any opinion not in step with the user of the word "troll".

I think Danbones got it right when he pointed out that the source of porn spam was government computers. Any legislation similar to the OP would do is expose the behind the scenes war games being used by nations against each other, with our political forums likely being frequented by foreign nationals who have an interest in our disarray.

reply to post by JailTales


Fair do's but have you legs? say it and run away

Once I worked in a pub and a group of guys came in (combat 18) and they started shouting at this guy and his girlfriend (who was black) I told them all to get out and they refused saying "are you going to throw us out" I said no but I know something that will, I went around back and brought out Benson (my landlords 14 stone rottweiler) never seen a bunch of guys piss emselves and run out of a place so quick lol.

R.I.P. GLP....

Originally posted by Numbers33four
"First they came for the [trolls] and I did not speak out--Because I was not a [troll]..."

edit on 12-6-2012 by Numbers33four because: (no reason given)

It's not even that simple. The definition of "troll" is very subjective... all you need to do is hurt someones feelings (intentionally or not) and they could easily label you a troll. Everyone has been a "troll" at some point on the internet. They can distort and warp "troll" to mean anything they want it to mean and target anyone who they want to target.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I think the worst thing is:
some of the "trolls" trying to sow dissention work for the foregn nationals that have stolen the US and Canadian and Western governments in general...Can't have that out fron and center
and CORPORATIONS like big Pharma, big oil, and the arms miesters, and the bankers... etc

off the top Megaphone and Cass Sundstien and the vaccine makers come to mind

....................
dang, hurt someones feelings?
Im in deep doo doo...
I have even hurt my own feelings with the odd post....
should not have been looking down the barrel when I hit reply