Its funny, but the very act of looking up if your a victim appears to wave your right to trial by court and requires you to go to mandatory arbitration.
As mentioned in the post, this isn't actually true. 1. the terms actually only say the arb clause applies to the monitoring service, not the rest of Equifax and 2. the company explicitly has said it doesn't apply to this breach.
I know this claim went viral today and got covered in lots of places, but it's simply not true.
We've updated the post based on some comments from a lawyer representing Dr. Phil's production company. We've explained the updates in an update paragraph at the top of the article.
I didn't read the article and I'm offended that you even posted the headline.
You didn't read the article? And yet you're so offended by it.
Anyone who assists in publicizing the 'statements' of these ethnocidal psychopaths is, well, not thinking too clearly. The only action I can take is to tell you that, and that I won't be back to TD for a long, long time. Bookmark deleted; making space at the top of my list.
You created a brand new account (and, yes, I see you just created this account) just to post that you'll never be back? Fascinating.
Anyway, if you're so offended by Al Jazeera that you'd be so upset with us as to never read us again for criticizing Al Jazeera -- well, good riddance.
Re: Re: Re: How To Clean Up Your Comments Section In Twelve Easy Steps
Yup. Everyone is free to read what I said, in context -- just as they did with Tim's comment. And we'll see how everyone reads it. Will they see the clearly stated point I made -- or will they assume that your trollish, out-of-context bullshit is accurate? Gee... I wonder...
I mean, this is fun for a late afternoon, pre-long weekend to kill some time, debunking trolls, but really, why do you bother? I'm curious. You've been on the site for so long. Most trolls grow out of it at some point. Yet you remain, and you go through various personas, pretending to be different people, but each more stupid and clueless than the next. Is it just the fun of trolling? Or is there something else there?
Re: How To Clean Up Your Comments Section In Twelve Easy Steps
SO I'm right that was done at behest of you and Techdirt. You stated it. Don't try to walk it back now.*
That's not what I said and you know it. I said that he was quoting President Obama, not saying it himself. I didn't state, nor imply, that he said it on behalf of me or Techdirt.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Well, when has Techdirt ever moderated, oh, say, Geigner?
And ALSO, you do not answer the question of when Geigner was ever "moderated" for that.
Again, that's up to the community. It appears that pretty much everyone but you understood the context and chose not to do anything. Actually, FWIW, there is not a single "report" vote on that comment, suggesting that EVEN YOU did not click. So, uh...
You simply state shouldn't be, then go on dodging with an attack.
No, I simply explained why it is I believe that the community chose not to moderate that comment -- because they understand that it's not abusive in context. And there was no "attack" just me giving my opinions.
You NOW seem trying to get me to drop repeating that, but no, so long as useful and on topic as here, I'll use it.
So you're admitting that you'll keep trolling about this even though it's been explained to you that you're trolling by taking it out of context? Fascinating. And you wonder why the community chooses to report your comments as trollish.
Re: Re: Re: Re: So where was the moderation with Geigner:
That's not what I see this end.
Well, then you might need to get your eyes checked. The only stuff by you we haven't let through would be when you do that idiotic thing of spamming the same thing over a bunch of times. Then we just clear one, and dump the rest. But if your comments get caught in the spam filter, we clear them when we have a chance. It's always been that way.
Evidently you're picking up on blaming Cloudflare, even though I reached the "Held For Moderation" stage and my comments often NEVER appear.
Who said anything about Cloudflare? And, again, you're simply wrong if you claim they never appear. We don't let through spam comments, but we always let through critical comments, no matter how inane -- as yours tend to be.
By the way, I've NO intention of losing interest here for foreseeable future, so expect me nearly every day, interest in topic prevailing. Thanks.
Sure. Given how long you've been around the site, that doesn't surprise me. It does amaze me that someone would want to spend so much of their time trolling a site with inane comments, but, it's your life to waste as you choose. And it's our community's call as to whether or not your comments remain visible. So far, they don't seem to appreciate you much.
Perhaps try not making completely clueless statements that just reveal a staggering level of ignorance. Or is educating yourself not worth it in your ample free time?
Again, as you well know, if your comments get caught in the spam filter, they get cleared out when someone here reviews them. That's why we had already cleared one of your repeats above by the time you reposted it again here. There is no need to keep trying. We always allow your comments through when they get caught in a spam filter. The fact that you keep shifting Tor addresses is probably the issue. Spam filters tend to be more skeptical of tor addresses because lots of spam comes from them (we get over 500 spam comments per day caught -- mainly via tor). Similarly, repeating the same comment over and over again is often seen as an indicator of spam. So, no need to keep posting.
As idiotic and nonsensical as your posts are, we always let them through.
Re: Well, when has Techdirt ever moderated, oh, say, Geigner?
Moderated down? EVER even admonished? Even after he obstintately repeated it recently? NO, Masnick hires him to re-write here!
That comment, as was made clear to you multiple times over multiple years, was Tim making a joke. It's a very famous quote from Barack Obama's own memoir. He was not making that statement on his own behalf. In context -- again, as has been explained multiple times to you -- he used it as a clear joke. If he'd used it as a normal ad hom, I have no doubt that the folks here would have moderated it.
But instead, it was him, responding to a known troll (you), and quoting from Obama's memoirs. I don't know why you continue to bring it up.
As a side note, I'm still not entirely sure why Techdirt finds these stories of news sites closing off comments to be such a big deal. I know we're all big fans of free speech here, but doesn't that include the right to decide whether or not you publish comments on your website?
It's not the closing of comments -- it's the claims that they're doing this for the benefit of their readers... And, yes, as others pointed out separately, part of it has to do with how we think about the journalism space and community.
Re: Now here's what I couldn't get in after 10 tries:
For what it's worth, I just checked the spam filter, and there was one attempt at a similar comment that was incorrectly caught as possible spam. It was released, as always, during our usual review. There were no 9 other tries. And, as always, we will release such comments, no matter how silly they may be.
Importantly, if Backpage were truly editing posts in a way that violated the law (including producing the content themselves), Section 230 already allows the DOJ to go after them for it. Yet another reason why no change in the law is necessary.
I still do not have a Facebook account. I can get by without Google if I decide to. I have managed quite well without MSFT product purchases for years at a time.
I know there are some people who will always make this argument, but that's a bit short-sighted. They may not be necessary for YOU, but that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone else.
A DNS service is a freaking luxury. Type in the IP address
So instead if all they had the power to do was socially isolate you and prevent you from participating in the social commons that you'd be ok with the FISA court having secret law?
Meaningless hypothetical.
We restrict the powers of gov't while making sure private entities have rights. That's all that's being discussed here. Government should not create secret law. You cannot opt out of being governed. Using an internet service is a different issue altogether, but there is much nuance here, which is why I wrote a giant post about all of it.
Re: Free speech and all those other rights and laws
It's not clear that you read the post at all. You seem to have made a bunch of assumptions about what we said that are directly contradicted by the post itself.
If a "platform" edits what the people who use it say, by deleting it wholly, do they lose their Section 230 protections?
No, not at all. Indeed, many people focus just on the part of CDA 230 that is about being free from liability, but miss out on the just as important "Good Samaritan clause" which is (c)(2)(A), which clearly states that any moderating behavior does not introduce liability.
This is important because it specifically encourages platforms to moderate content without fear of introducing new liability.
So, deleting content does not diminish 230 protections. Indeed, part of the purpose of 230 was actually to incentivize platforms to delete "indecent" content.
On the post: Dear Government Employees: Asking Questions - Even Dumb Ones - Is Not A Criminal Offense
Re:
On the post: Dear Government Employees: Asking Questions - Even Dumb Ones - Is Not A Criminal Offense
Re: Is one of these things not like the other?
On the post: Las Vegas Police Union Fire Off Whining, Flag-Dripping Request To The NFL To 'Investigate' Michael Bennett For Saying Things
Re: Policing the Details
On the post: Equifax Security Breach Is A Complete Disaster... And Will Almost Certainly Get Worse
Re: Its all about lawsuit prevention
Its funny, but the very act of looking up if your a victim appears to wave your right to trial by court and requires you to go to mandatory arbitration.
As mentioned in the post, this isn't actually true. 1. the terms actually only say the arb clause applies to the monitoring service, not the rest of Equifax and 2. the company explicitly has said it doesn't apply to this breach.
I know this claim went viral today and got covered in lots of places, but it's simply not true.
On the post: Awful Court Decision Says Dr. Phil Producer's Video Not 'Fair Use'
Updated
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re:
I didn't read the article and I'm offended that you even posted the headline.
You didn't read the article? And yet you're so offended by it.
Anyone who assists in publicizing the 'statements' of these ethnocidal psychopaths is, well, not thinking too clearly. The only action I can take is to tell you that, and that I won't be back to TD for a long, long time. Bookmark deleted; making space at the top of my list.
You created a brand new account (and, yes, I see you just created this account) just to post that you'll never be back? Fascinating.
Anyway, if you're so offended by Al Jazeera that you'd be so upset with us as to never read us again for criticizing Al Jazeera -- well, good riddance.
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re: Re: Re: How To Clean Up Your Comments Section In Twelve Easy Steps
I mean, this is fun for a late afternoon, pre-long weekend to kill some time, debunking trolls, but really, why do you bother? I'm curious. You've been on the site for so long. Most trolls grow out of it at some point. Yet you remain, and you go through various personas, pretending to be different people, but each more stupid and clueless than the next. Is it just the fun of trolling? Or is there something else there?
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re: How To Clean Up Your Comments Section In Twelve Easy Steps
That's not what I said and you know it. I said that he was quoting President Obama, not saying it himself. I didn't state, nor imply, that he said it on behalf of me or Techdirt.
I mean, come on.
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Well, when has Techdirt ever moderated, oh, say, Geigner?
And ALSO, you do not answer the question of when Geigner was ever "moderated" for that.
Again, that's up to the community. It appears that pretty much everyone but you understood the context and chose not to do anything. Actually, FWIW, there is not a single "report" vote on that comment, suggesting that EVEN YOU did not click. So, uh...
You simply state shouldn't be, then go on dodging with an attack.
No, I simply explained why it is I believe that the community chose not to moderate that comment -- because they understand that it's not abusive in context. And there was no "attack" just me giving my opinions.
You NOW seem trying to get me to drop repeating that, but no, so long as useful and on topic as here, I'll use it.
So you're admitting that you'll keep trolling about this even though it's been explained to you that you're trolling by taking it out of context? Fascinating. And you wonder why the community chooses to report your comments as trollish.
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re: Re: Re: Re: So where was the moderation with Geigner:
That's not what I see this end.
Well, then you might need to get your eyes checked. The only stuff by you we haven't let through would be when you do that idiotic thing of spamming the same thing over a bunch of times. Then we just clear one, and dump the rest. But if your comments get caught in the spam filter, we clear them when we have a chance. It's always been that way.
Evidently you're picking up on blaming Cloudflare, even though I reached the "Held For Moderation" stage and my comments often NEVER appear.
Who said anything about Cloudflare? And, again, you're simply wrong if you claim they never appear. We don't let through spam comments, but we always let through critical comments, no matter how inane -- as yours tend to be.
By the way, I've NO intention of losing interest here for foreseeable future, so expect me nearly every day, interest in topic prevailing. Thanks.
Sure. Given how long you've been around the site, that doesn't surprise me. It does amaze me that someone would want to spend so much of their time trolling a site with inane comments, but, it's your life to waste as you choose. And it's our community's call as to whether or not your comments remain visible. So far, they don't seem to appreciate you much.
Perhaps try not making completely clueless statements that just reveal a staggering level of ignorance. Or is educating yourself not worth it in your ample free time?
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re: Re: Re: Well, when has Techdirt ever moderated, oh, say, Geigner?
SHOW ME ONE TIME THAT WAS EXPLAINED.
Um, like just a few comments down. And you responded to it so you clearly saw it. I mean, come on...
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110621/16071614792/misconceptions-free-abound-why-do-brain s-stop-zero.shtml#c1965
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re: Re: So where was the moderation with Geigner:
As idiotic and nonsensical as your posts are, we always let them through.
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re: Well, when has Techdirt ever moderated, oh, say, Geigner?
Moderated down? EVER even admonished? Even after he obstintately repeated it recently? NO, Masnick hires him to re-write here!
That comment, as was made clear to you multiple times over multiple years, was Tim making a joke. It's a very famous quote from Barack Obama's own memoir. He was not making that statement on his own behalf. In context -- again, as has been explained multiple times to you -- he used it as a clear joke. If he'd used it as a normal ad hom, I have no doubt that the folks here would have moderated it.
But instead, it was him, responding to a known troll (you), and quoting from Obama's memoirs. I don't know why you continue to bring it up.
On the post: Al Jazeera Gives A 'Voice To The Voiceless' By Killing News Comments
Re:
As a side note, I'm still not entirely sure why Techdirt finds these stories of news sites closing off comments to be such a big deal. I know we're all big fans of free speech here, but doesn't that include the right to decide whether or not you publish comments on your website?
It's not the closing of comments -- it's the claims that they're doing this for the benefit of their readers... And, yes, as others pointed out separately, part of it has to do with how we think about the journalism space and community.
On the post: Deputy Attorney General Trots Out All Sorts Of Silly Analogies About 'Intellectual Property'
Re: Now here's what I couldn't get in after 10 tries:
On the post: Sex Trafficking Expert: CDA 230 Helps Victims And SESTA Would Harm Trafficking Victims
Re:
On the post: Nazis, The Internet, Policing Content And Free Speech
Re: Too many assumptions about what is necessary.
I still do not have a Facebook account. I can get by without Google if I decide to. I have managed quite well without MSFT product purchases for years at a time.
I know there are some people who will always make this argument, but that's a bit short-sighted. They may not be necessary for YOU, but that doesn't necessarily apply to everyone else.
A DNS service is a freaking luxury. Type in the IP address
You are not a serious person.
On the post: Nazis, The Internet, Policing Content And Free Speech
Re: Re: Re:
So instead if all they had the power to do was socially isolate you and prevent you from participating in the social commons that you'd be ok with the FISA court having secret law?
Meaningless hypothetical.
We restrict the powers of gov't while making sure private entities have rights. That's all that's being discussed here. Government should not create secret law. You cannot opt out of being governed. Using an internet service is a different issue altogether, but there is much nuance here, which is why I wrote a giant post about all of it.
On the post: Nazis, The Internet, Policing Content And Free Speech
Re: Free speech and all those other rights and laws
On the post: Nazis, The Internet, Policing Content And Free Speech
Re: Serious Question
If a "platform" edits what the people who use it say, by deleting it wholly, do they lose their Section 230 protections?
No, not at all. Indeed, many people focus just on the part of CDA 230 that is about being free from liability, but miss out on the just as important "Good Samaritan clause" which is (c)(2)(A), which clearly states that any moderating behavior does not introduce liability.
This is important because it specifically encourages platforms to moderate content without fear of introducing new liability.
So, deleting content does not diminish 230 protections. Indeed, part of the purpose of 230 was actually to incentivize platforms to delete "indecent" content.
Next >>