If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
OT, sorta: I can annoy you, you can't annoy me
[]
Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime. It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity. http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-anno...l?tag=fd_carsl -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Attacking Bushonomics is too easy, like shooting a lame duck -- Sebastian Mallaby |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
OT, sorta: I can annoy you, you can't annoy me
"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
... [] Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime. It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity. So you are allowed to do it as long as you sign your name? As I read the article, it also includes actual threatening and harassment. If they really wanted to do something, why didn't they put a stop to all those politicians who called me up to two dozen times a day during the last presidential election? (Yeah, yeah. I know.) It's not so great to live in a battleground state. Especially if you're in a rural part of it that most politicians will never see. Heck, they're probably surprised to learn that we have actual phone service. Now in fairness, each time Barbara Bush or Bernie What's-his-name from NYC called me, they *did* identify themselves so I could hang up quickly. ~~Judy |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
OT, sorta: I can annoy you, you can't annoy me
In article ,
Judy wrote: So you are allowed to do it as long as you sign your name? As I read the article, it also includes actual threatening and harassment. It's a seriously messed-up law in a number of ways. I think threats and harassment are reasonably well understood under the law, albeit with some grey area, but "annoying" is just amazingly subjective (although I expect there's some unanimity in these quarters about who's clearly in violation of this law). But also there's the problem of privacy and disclosure. I do think that buried in the big, stinking poopheap of bad reasons for anonymity are some very good reasons for anonymity and I hate to see those punished. It's part of a more general problem in the US that there's not particularly high regard for individual privacy in general (whether or not it's protected by the Constitution is still contested), and that's why we have far worse problems with identity theft and credit card fraud than do countries with stronger privacy protections. The flip side is that we kind of let corporate entities run amok and their "privacy" does tend to be protected (for example, lax- to-nonexistent disclosure laws on a variety of topics [including identity theft (hah!)]). If they really wanted to do something, why didn't they put a stop to all those politicians who called me up to two dozen times a day during the last presidential election? (Yeah, yeah. I know.) It's not so great to live in a battleground state. At least they pretend you exist. It's not so great to live in a state that's considered a lock for a particular party, either. Now in fairness, each time Barbara Bush or Bernie What's-his-name from NYC called me, they *did* identify themselves so I could hang up quickly. Now me, I would definitely have a word or two with Barbara Bush. -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Attacking Bushonomics is too easy, like shooting a lame duck -- Sebastian Mallaby |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
OT, sorta: I can annoy you, you can't annoy me
"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
... It's a seriously messed-up law in a number of ways. I think threats and harassment are reasonably well understood under the law, albeit with some grey area, but "annoying" is just amazingly subjective I'm still trying to figure out why if you sign your name that it becomes okay. And if you don't, then it's not. You know, I keep trying to like Arlen Specter just a little. The alternatives to him have been just too awful. But here is yet another reason it is too difficult for me to pull off. (Assuming I ever forgive him for that whole Anita Hill questioning.) It's not so great to live in a battleground state. At least they pretend you exist. No, they don't really. They spend a little money to make recorded phone calls. But it's not as if they're really interested in what I think. And they don't really want me to get out and vote. It's not so great to live in a state that's considered a lock for a particular party, either. When we drove across Iowa in November, I kept looking around and trying to figure out what all those politicians actually DO while they're out there. And wondering how many of them ever return. I *have* thought more than once that what happens to the residents in New Hampshire might be nice to try just once. Now in fairness, each time Barbara Bush or Bernie What's-his-name from NYC called me, they *did* identify themselves so I could hang up quickly. Now me, I would definitely have a word or two with Barbara Bush. Unfortunately, as you might expect, she reserved the right to do all the talking and none of the listening. Because, yeah, I blame her even more than his father for the way he turned out. ~~Judy |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
OT, sorta: I can annoy you, you can't annoy me
Judy wrote:
You know, I keep trying to like Arlen Specter just a little. The alternatives to him have been just too awful. But here is yet another reason it is too difficult for me to pull off. Believe me, I feel your pain. (Assuming I ever forgive him for that whole Anita Hill questioning.) Oh, wait. -- Mark Shaw (And Baron) moc TOD liamg TA wahsnm ================================================== ======================= "Dogs love their friends and bite their enemies, quite unlike people, who are incapable of pure love and always have to mix love and hate." - Sigmund Freud |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dire Wolves what if (sorta) | Dilbert Firestorm | Dogs - general | 0 | August 29th 03 04:29 AM |