EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

More reason to be less abusive?
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1682
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 7:33 pm ]
Post subject:  More reason to be less abusive?

For full story click here

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.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.

Author:  RF [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 7:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: More reason to be less abusive?

Wayne Stollings wrote:
For full story click here

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.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.


It's always been a crime to annoy authority.

Author:  phantomuk [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: More reason to be less abusive?

Wayne Stollings wrote:
For full story click here

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.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.


Not good for Americans ;)

Author:  redfurrymonster84 [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:41 pm ]
Post subject: 

That is so retarded.... :x

Author:  RF [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:46 pm ]
Post subject: 

redfurrymonster84 wrote:
That is so retarded.... :x


Well here's the thing.

Even though "retarded" is a common slang expression that has become so generic it is virtually meaningless in the literal sense of the term when used in such slang context...and even though I suspect you didn't intend it be taken as anything insulting except to the authors of the referenced law...there are some people who find it highly offensive. Not to mention annoying.

Author:  josh knauer [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 10:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: More reason to be less abusive?

Wayne Stollings wrote:
For full story click here

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.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.

You have got to be kidding (and I know you're not). This is insanity. I have never seen a more unenforceable law! How on earth could you define "annoy". I think everyone posting on this forum (including me) has annoyed someone else at some point in time and most people don't post under their real name (nor are they required to).

It constantly amazes me how ignorant congresspeople can be. I'm posting this under my real name, so I guess that makes me Licensed to Annoy congresspeople. :roll:

-josh

Author:  Theila [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:18 pm ]
Post subject: 

How can you even define 'annoy'. What annoys one person may not be annoying to the next.

I think our Congressmen need lobotomies. The whole lot of them.

My mother-in-law once asked me what I thought needs to be done to fix the government. I said fire them all, get rid of the Democrat and Republican parties and start from scratch.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:42 pm ]
Post subject: 

Theila wrote:
How can you even define 'annoy'. What annoys one person may not be annoying to the next.

I think our Congressmen need lobotomies. The whole lot of them.

My mother-in-law once asked me what I thought needs to be done to fix the government. I said fire them all, get rid of the Democrat and Republican parties and start from scratch.


It is like pornography in their minds ... "I cannot define it, but I know it when I see it" type thing ....

Author:  Sandra John [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 1:10 am ]
Post subject: 

Wayne Stollings wrote:
Theila wrote:
How can you even define 'annoy'. What annoys one person may not be annoying to the next.

I think our Congressmen need lobotomies. The whole lot of them.

My mother-in-law once asked me what I thought needs to be done to fix the government. I said fire them all, get rid of the Democrat and Republican parties and start from scratch.


It is like pornography in their minds ... "I cannot define it, but I know it when I see it" type thing ....


Or, "I don't anything about art but I know what I like". :lol: Thing is though, recognizing something and being able to define it in words is not the same thing, There is, in fact, despite disagreements, a very high degree of consensus on such things.

Author:  wijim [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:29 am ]
Post subject: 

RF wrote:
redfurrymonster84 wrote:
That is so retarded.... :x


Well here's the thing.

Even though "retarded" is a common slang expression that has become so generic it is virtually meaningless in the literal sense of the term when used in such slang context...and even though I suspect you didn't intend it be taken as anything insulting except to the authors of the referenced law...there are some people who find it highly offensive. Not to mention annoying.



why has this gone unaddressed? its very true. im not slamming red-furry....but really redfurry monster....that is like using the term * in alot of circles. not sure if you were aware of that. im not personally offended by the use of retarded or retard. but many many people are.

Author:  phantomuk [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:39 am ]
Post subject: 

wijim wrote:
RF wrote:
redfurrymonster84 wrote:
That is so retarded.... :x


Well here's the thing.

Even though "retarded" is a common slang expression that has become so generic it is virtually meaningless in the literal sense of the term when used in such slang context...and even though I suspect you didn't intend it be taken as anything insulting except to the authors of the referenced law...there are some people who find it highly offensive. Not to mention annoying.



why has this gone unaddressed? its very true. im not slamming red-furry....but really redfurry monster....that is like using the term * in alot of circles. not sure if you were aware of that. im not personally offended by the use of retarded or retard. but many many people are.


Retarded is ment as backward. If it was pointed towards a mentaly handicapped person the it would be a problem. Young people use it as sland in a different way and since she is 13 I think you are just saying it to wind a certain person up about his stance on the rules IMO.

Just remember that she is 13 and a child. Innocence still does exist at this age you know :roll:


After your dig at my dyslexia I find this statement of your a direct attack on me lets face it that's why you put it there :roll:

Quote:
a/r=illiteracy and misinformation so sayeth the huntscum.

Author:  wijim [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:04 am ]
Post subject: 

phantomuk wrote:
wijim wrote:
RF wrote:
redfurrymonster84 wrote:
That is so retarded.... :x


Well here's the thing.

Even though "retarded" is a common slang expression that has become so generic it is virtually meaningless in the literal sense of the term when used in such slang context...and even though I suspect you didn't intend it be taken as anything insulting except to the authors of the referenced law...there are some people who find it highly offensive. Not to mention annoying.



why has this gone unaddressed? its very true. im not slamming red-furry....but really redfurry monster....that is like using the term * in alot of circles. not sure if you were aware of that. im not personally offended by the use of retarded or retard. but many many people are.


Retarded is ment as backward. If it was pointed towards a mentaly handicapped person the it would be a problem. Young people use it as sland in a different way and since she is 13 I think you are just saying it to wind a certain person up about his stance on the rules IMO.

Just remember that she is 13 and a child. Innocence still does exist at this age you know :roll:


After your dig at my dyslexia I find this statement of your a direct attack on me lets face it that's why you put it there :roll:

Quote:
a/r=illiteracy and misinformation so sayeth the huntscum.


ignorance is no excuse for using derogatory language. im not complaining abvout his/her use. i am merely letting him/her know how that term is viewed by alot of people. no im not trying to whip josh up phantom. didnt work the first time i tried it i find no sense in trying it again.

my signature is not a dig at your condition. it is a humourous proclaimation of how i feel about being labeled huntscum.

im done with this line of contention with you in this thread as to go on further would be a violation of taste. the only reason i responded was to explain what might not already be obvious to some.

Author:  redfurrymonster84 [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

I do not mean it to offend anybody here or anybody at all and if it really does I will edit it out of my post. Just because I am young doesn't mean I do not know what it means. Ok?

Author:  redfurrymonster84 [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:45 pm ]
Post subject: 

phantomuk wrote:

After your dig at my dyslexia I find this statement of your a direct attack on me lets face it that's why you put it there :roll:



I had no clue you have dyslexia or if you even if you are telling the truth though and why the heck would you think it was an "attack on you"?

Author:  phantomuk [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:46 pm ]
Post subject: 

redfurrymonster84 wrote:
phantomuk wrote:

After your dig at my dyslexia I find this statement of your a direct attack on me lets face it that's why you put it there :roll:



I had no clue you have dyslexia or if you even if you are telling the truth though and why the heck would you think it was an "attack on you"?


a/r=illiteracy

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/