Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt13

Too much monies to be made with the "ILCF Buster 2008™", it's the capitalist way! :)

I know it is too soon to be doing the actual coding on this one sheepboy, but any chance we can get a peak at a rough draft of some of the documentation that will accompany it ?

How about a config file layout ? :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt13

The Morally Vetted Internet Experience that tools like you 'approve' of for the rest of the plebeans, less able to discern the moral high ground? ...

(etc, etc, etc)

Wanna lighten up on the ad-hominem, thanks ? You really don't have to be taking alternative opinions to yours on ILCF so personally and it does none of us any favours to try and take your own obvious dissatisfaction re: the ILCF trials, out on me.

I've stayed out of the thread dedicated specifically to the support of preventing ILCF, for I have no right to be there because of my contrary view point, but I would thank you to lay off with the abuse and lazy appeals to "trolling" directed my way, for I have just as much right to my opinion and presense in this particular thread as you do, regardless of how much we may disagree with each other's chosen stance. Cheers.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt13

Do you understand the concept that the banned list will not be available to the public? How is there going to be any sort of accountability?

Why should Joe Shmo be privy to such controlled material ?

Isn't it the job of a created/delegated/accountable department to do the accounting ? Wouldn't suitable avenues be created to allow a degree of controlled public access as required – ie, via court orders/requests in relation to criminal proceedings or lawsuits and the like ?

I'm no more interested in knowing the contents of any banned list than I am of knowing where the Oz navy was last week or much else of what our elected government may have put under seal (or whatever) for our country's own good.

We cast out vote and trust the system we have created for ourselves, and when we cannot, we pressure for improvement.

Which, as it relates to ILCF, gets back to numbers again.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt13

I do have to question derspatz's bona fides – mate – why do you hide? Notice all of us here have our whims turned on. Except you.

Already explained at my blog (which doesn't have comments turned on either – nor do I log/track/sitemeter visitors). I have neither the time nor interest in exchanging private messages here or on any other forum or blog and in fact I barely even use email or the telephone for anything other than taking care of business.

I am known to leave the odd comment or message on other folk's blogs and web pages on rare occasions, but even then I prefer that things said are deemed public domain.

I don't respond to "friend" invites on my "facile book" and "my spaz" accounts, either – I've already got all the friends I want and barely communicate with them in the offline world (let alone online one) anyway.

Private implies confidential and I'm not interested in keeping confidences or having people making inaccurate claims about me based on private exchanges, or leaving avenues open by which cowardly anonymous abuse and threats or stalking like behaviour can easily occur.

In over 20 years of online communications, I have never been the fan of (nor encouraged) recreational private communications where I could get away with it being public. That isn't about to change any time soon.

Suggesting that by only partaking in public conversations is somehow "hiding" has got me scratching my head though. Heck, my blog link is up there on the left and it links through to heaps of personal information (including my full real name), yet I only know the real names of two people in this forum (richary and -mark) and that is only because we go back near 20 years to a time of online communications that preceded the proliferation of the web.

Anyway, if you've got something to say to me, then say it so that the public record can remain proof of it, and I'll return the same decency. Cheers.

If you can't say it in the foum then it probably shouldn't be said, hmmm ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt13

I will continue to use the internet the do the 'wrong thing' because it will not and cannot stop me, nor many others.

If it does try to stop me from doing something I want to do, I will circumvent it within seconds.

It will fail to achieve its intended purpose, but rather merely limit our nation to internet speeds that other countries had many years ago.

I cannot see why you think this is a good idea.

So even with your circumventions in seconds, it is still going to slow you down ?

Not only that, but going to slow a lot of other people down too ?

One would think that if things got slow enough, lots of certain folk would give up on doing a whole bunch of stuff that they couldn't be bothered (or were unable) to wait around for.

Sound like a bit of a win to me. :)

The reality though is that the general population probably won't notice any kind of slow down that they are not already used to.

I do accept though that the slightest speed drop anywhere at anytime WILL be blamed on ILCF even though it will be the same old same old being actually responsible. IE, peak periods, holiday times, sporting events, blah, blah, blah, etc, etc, etc.

Sad to read that you're bent on doing "the wrong thing" in Oz mind you. That isn't very community minded or neighbourly, let alone something to be proud of. Please reconsider.

regarDS