"Queen Bees" and "Invading Poland"

The following more recent Moderation of yours truly was born out the situation where on two recent occasions a forum member somewhere created topics to try and rabble rouse to get members they didn't like or get along with, permanently banned from membership of that forum.

Their second attempt actually succeeded ... but with an opportunity cost that included a long standing and well respected Moderator renouncing their own forum membership and moderating hat.

Obviously using the "ignore" function wasn't enough for the rabble rousing member, and unfortunately my suggestion to "piss off" to "go and invade poland" fell on deaf ears too.

Now as this particular rabble rousing forum member had made such a big thing about their advancing pregnancy (with a forum topic dedicated to it even) and had shared far and wide various problems that had cropped up on the home front, and because this forum member had also expressed in various ways their desire to be stress free, I penned the following as a reasonable suggestion that could see her more important concerns suitably dealt with and without having to make the entire forum conform to her way of thinking.

[userid snipped] said: "a call was put out a few months ago by ADMIN of this place, asking for donations to keep the board going - doesnt that give us mere members some kind of right to air a grievance or concern?"

[derspatz replied]
No.

Doing the right and responsible thing doesn't entitle such "rights" ... and such "rights" can't be bought either ... and nor should they be.

Also, perhaps it is time you started thinking a bit more about the unborn you've rendered yourself responsible for the well-being of and chose to clear off from this stressful and conflicting (etc, etc, etc) online environment that is so obviously provoking your ire and causing you so much grief and inspiring your repetative "wah, waa, waa"ing and desire to stomp your jackboots over anyone and anything that isn't to your liking, regardless of what anyone else wants or likes.

Why not use the remaining time between now and a certain precious birthday coming up to nick off from here and at last take care of all the crap in your much publicised offline life that has been allowed to slip and come back and bite, so that by the time the new mouth arrives to suckle, all is at peace and calm in your life ?

I doubt if anyone would mind if you took such a break, especially seeing how I suspect most would probably think it would be a good idea if only for the sake/wellbeing of the child you are carrying.

This is derspatz speaking frankly and sincerely here. I really don't think these forums are a healthy place for the unborn of a pregnant woman with a short fuse and the nature thus far exampled ... and I *definitely* don't think that the membership here should particularly change or moderate to accommodate one such as you as you are now, especially seeing how there are more suitable forums out there for ladies in your condition.

Why should we ?

regarDS

Obviously this sensible suggestion and solution didn't go down well with the person busy trying to get members kicked out, and nor with the rabble being roused, and before anyone could say "go and invade poland" three times quickly, poor little me was slapped with the following:

Date: 24-07-2009, 08:32 PM
From: [A Moderator]
Subject: You have received an infraction at [location snipped]

Dear derspatz,

You have received an infraction at [location snipped]

Reason: Harmful action against another member
-------
Personal attacks against other members will not be tolerated. You have no right to tell another poster when and how often to post, and certainly no right to bring their personal life into it.
-------
This infraction is worth [snipped] and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post: [URL snipped ... and I've just reproduced it above anyway]

All the best,[location snipped]

And here is my reply I logged to that Moderation notice.

Date: 25-07-2009, 10:57 AM
From: derspatz
Subject: Re: You have received an infraction at [location snipped]

>> Dear derspatz,
Goodmorning [member names snipped] and/or the Mod Team. I'd like to log a reply for the record. No worries on the holiday, BTW. Tis your forum, your rules, and I continue to respect that even in the face of what I feel to be a mis-judgment this time around.

>> You have received an infraction at [location snipped]

Presumably because a certain gang up preferred to push a "report" button rather than actually properly read something. Ah well, my bad for not expressing myself a more clearly.

>> Reason: Harmful action against another member

I both disagree with and dispute that for I've not done any such thing as what follows in what is quoted below that:

>> Personal attacks against other members will not be tolerated.

Nor should they be, yet meanwhile we've got two threads [url snipped] and: [url snipped] created by a member here for the EXPRESS purpose of rabble rousing in order to get members they don't like, run out of here. A member who then used those threads to post [url snipped] and [url snipped]

Is it really a "personal attack" to calmly suggest to somebody who is so busy rabble rousing to get other members driven out that a well respected member of the Mod team renounces her position and membership here, that rather than try and drive out others, this place may not be the healthiest and best place for them right now ?

Seem kinda out of wack that an infraction should come my way on that.

>> You have no right to tell another poster when and how often to post, and certainly no right to bring their personal life into it.

I agree, which is why I've not "told" ANY other poster when or how often to post, ever.

The more posts, the better AFAIC - I'm all about trying to inspire more posts not less ... as opposed to the member(s) who seem to be more about shutting various folk up forever. I've also not brought anything into the online discussions regarding [userid snipped] in particular that she isn't busy sharing about herself and inviting comment on, complete with a thread dedicated to it.

Yes, one of my comments to what she is putting out about herself, questions as to whether this place is the healthiest place for her if she finds herself so in the need to run out of town other members who she chooses to have a problem with, just so she can have her peace and quiet and associated love-in.

Obviously the recent and repeated individually targetted upset [member name snipped] has brought to this forum lately doesn't sit right with me. Yes, it bothers me the kind of direction she appears to want to take this forum in ... and it obviously considerably bothered [resigned mod member name snipped] too.

I'm all for the accommodating of all points of view (especially when it leads to robust and lively debate and discussion), but these recent attempts by one person to drive other members out, is getting to be a real downer ... and are surely against Forum Roolz ?

That she also used both the [topic name snipped] and [topic name snipped] threads she created to basically suggest that donating to the upkeep of this free forum should entitle a say in its running, demonstrates at least to me where her mind really is.

The reign of "Queen Bee" in the Prisoner series springs to mind.

Anyway, for the sake of some peace and quiet while a few things die down, I'll cop this one sweet (and I suspect sweeter than if the ruling had gone in another more justified direction) and cheers for your time and patience.

I do like this place and I shall continue to promote and support it as far and as wide as my regular online travels take me, and hopefully it will never go down the path of exclusivity that the likes of [member name] seem to want to take it.

regarDS

[repeat of original message snipped]

Feel free to comment, but (as per usual) don't expect outright abuse to be published ...

regarDS

Posted by whirlpool Admin re: Broadband Forums

At last whirlpool mod "WarT" has finally managed to lie his way via dishonest, unjust, unbalanced, and abuse of authority type moderating (as this very derblat list continues to bear witness to) to having "derspatz" permanently banned from "broadband" forums and my voice silenced there on the subject of ISP Level Content Filtering.

And there was great rejoicing from the anti-ILCF pro-pr0n circle-jerkers ?! :)

Actually, they are so starved for a whipping-boy that they've resorted to manufacturing their own "turn on and off at will" devil's advocate. Heh.

Anyway, here is the message delivering the perma-ban. Apparently it was sent on Friday but as I rarely actually log on I didn't get it until a moment a go. Enjoy.

Friday at 5:42 am
Forum Ban
As per previous warnings and your inability to refrain from trolling and hijacking discussion in the Broadband forum, you now no longer have the ability to post there

Such bans are permanent

Sorry Harlen, I know that playing the D.A. is wearing you down but I can't offer to tag and take over from ya now. :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt36

Ok, now that I've done my pro Conroy and pro Bolt thing by way of balance here is a bit of free info that some might want to use as ammunition from the other side of things.

As a Born Again Christian since 1982 I reckon I can offer some insight into how that particular brand of human Generally thinks when it comes to "Free Speech/expression" and "Democrazy".

Fear not, I'll be brief and it should mostly be obvious to ya'll anyway (though remembering back through the last 35 clusters of pages, maybe not).

In short, us xtoids (especially the Fanatical Religious Zealots) really only reckon GOOD speech/expression should be made free and easy, and to hell with the rest. No surprises there.

As for democrazy, this next one may come as a surprise.

We don't really want it, it isn't want we are working towards and we only put up with it because it can be made to serve us while we wait for God to sort us all out once and for all. We actually want a theocracy/benevolent dictator but will accept no-one for the job but God (coz we don't want Taliban or Priests tellings us what for either), so merely put up with/use democrazy in the meantime.

Have you ever heard or read in the ancient writings usually deemed sacred to xtoids about the "Democrazy of Heaven" ?

But Of Course not - but why haven't you noticed that before hmmm ?

Tis always "Kingdom of Heaven" this and "Kingdom of Heaven" that, along with the promise do away with the governments and kingdoms of man on earth and replace it with the same kind of system used in Heaven.

THIS is what we are working towards and want and THIS is why we don't really care about protecting "democrazy" nor any freedoms of speech or expression that are so easily deemed to be less than worthwhile or ultimately profitable to one's soul.

Now, aren't both Senator Conroy and PM Rudd of somewhat xtoid persuasion ?

Glad to be of service.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt36

Mark Newton writes...
He was defensive. It was almost embarrassing to watch, and he looked defeated.

... and yet my partner (who until tonight had heard nor knew anything about the filtering issue or my involvement in online "discussions" about it, or the "waa, waa, waa"ing going on from a certain minority, etc) and I thought completely the opposite of your above suggestions, Mark.

Unbidden, she (a school teacher, BTW) found herself of similar view to Andrew Bolt (who I ButOfCourse thought was brilliant and right on the money as per usual) and was scornfully laughing at the irony and hypocrisy and assault upon both reason and the higher responsibilities of freedom/democrazy that both the audience questioners and female and/or more left-wing panel members were spouting forth.

What we both noticed and appreciated the most though was that although Senator Conroy was in the company of both initially a mostly hostile audience and panel, by keeping to the bottom-line and fundamentals, both the panel and audience (who weren't necessarily the rabid rabble they first appeared to be) he soon won them all over to a mostly respectful and understanding silence.

Sure, Andrew Bolts aided in this (to the degree that the lady in the scarf shared her agreement, though no prizes for Andrew for the way he received that agreement. The lad just can't help himself. heh.) but it was obvious that despite the initial planned (and yes, obviously expected) ambush and hijacking of Senator Conroy on the ILCF topic, he won the studio over and not even Tony seemed game to weigh in with his predictable opinions like he usually does.

Based on the uproar usually exampled in these forums one would have expected the TV audience to be comparably vocal (especially considering other episodes of qanda and Tony's calls for order in the past), but no, it would seem that under studio lighting, folk more prone to anonymous outbursts and ranting may well be more inclined to behave reasonably, especially when their confrontations with cold hard logic are rendered a tad more accountable.

All in all, I reckon that it looks like the ALP has a winner with Stephen Conroy and I would expect that they will be keeping him out in front for some time to come, and that the general public will be more likely to side with what he and Andrew had to say on the matter than the publisher and that climate change bloke.

Congrats Senator Conroy on a job well done (you certainly earned your travel allowance for that one !) and cheers to you as always Andrew Bolt (btw, I luvved and cross-posted heaps your stuff on the Uncle Bill and his happy snaps of kiddies thang last year.)

Mark, you obviously might wish that this ILCF thing is a major player on the good Senator's dinner plate, but I doubt if it even rates as a garnish, let alone as one of his essential food-groups.

AFAIC, by the end of that aspect of qanda, the body language of most of the audience and panel seemed to indicate an attitude that the topic was at most much ado about nothing and could we please now talk about something else.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

derspatz writes...See: http://sydwalker.info/blog/2008/12/08/having-fun-falsifying-history/

I am fascinated that you have linked Syd Walker's blog. He is almost fanatically anti-censorship.

Would you lot accept my message on this particular subject any other way ? :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

( @ ) Lillary ( @ ) writes...
(again, Derspatz excepted from that statement as he is an expert at playing with himself). *Oops, I suspect I'm about to have my post removed!

lol. solipsists r us ?

*I guess that makes you and me, both ... :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

Source?

And another source for you which details even better why the recent change to the Cleanfeed wiki amounts to vandalism.

See: http://sydwalker.info/blog/2008/12/08/having-fun-falsifying-history/

There are plenty of other examples out there if you care to look. Just put +lapin +curtailment +child +precious.

Now, who is going to undo the recent wiki vandalism in that regard ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

Source?

For starters, try: http://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/lapin.htm where the Rabbi pretends to be Hitler and writes "Finally, dear Julius, you will remember what I frequently said and wrote in Mein Kampf: "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people." I explained that as long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. It is truly heartwarming to see how well this lesson has been learned by the American government. In the name of children, incursions into the private lives of American citizens have been made that we Nazis would have gazed at with open-mouthed admiration. Does it matter that our bodies failed as long as our spirit still triumphs?"

Now THAT is where the wiki quote has been lifted from, with only a tiny portion of it being Hitler's words from Mein Kamf.

Thus, the wiki quote should be attributed to Rabbi Daniel Lapin, yes ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

The quote is indeed from Mein Kampf which was dictated by Adolf Hitler. Rabbi Daniel Lapin is not whom stated this quote.

Just fixed that up on the wiki

by now making the wiki incorrect. Go back a page or two in this thread and you will see another user has provided a DIRECT LINK to "Mein Kamf" and what Hitler wrote re: "the Child" and it is NOT what you have now just misattributed on the wiki.

What is in the wiki is a quote from the Rabbi, nothing more and nothing less and if you want to put something there that Hitler actualy said, then I suggest you actually look up Hitler's book and properly quote it.

Here is the link the another user provided a moment ago.
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=berhcMAjzZEC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=The+state+must+declare+the+child&source=bl&ots=KH_Nso_26V&sig=dds3AtPQXQAUCG2jBlovhEmhkbs&hl=en&ei=HOjFSf--HpSZkQX_wszDDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA72,M1

Now compare that to what is on the wiki and to what the Rabbi wrote and tell the forum who rightfully should be attributed for what has been recorded verbatim on the wiki ... and then go undo your vandalism.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

The state must declare the child ... --Hitler.

A common misattribution for the quote as you gave, for it was actually penned by Rabbi Daniel Lapin. For future reference, see the quotes section of cleanfeed wiki found here: http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=Cleanfeed

regarDS
http://twitter.com/derspatz

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

.....mandatory reporting by ISPs to a central Government agency

Yeah right.

I think we can fairly describe your post as a troll.

Banks aren't alone in being required to follow "mandatory reporting" to a Government agency, so why not ISPs in the future ?

It's called "checks and balances" and helps make a system work better.

Anyway, AFAIC, always calling "Troll" at those who hold different opinions than your own, tends to merely demonstrate your own fears and narrowmindedness.

No doubt you've also herringed me rather than risk being exposed to contrary opinion, and would like to see me banned from these threads ? Don't worry, that sword of Damacles has been hanging over my neck for some time now (compliments of a whim months ago from mods/admin indicating I was only but one mod attention away from a permenant ban in the broadband area) and I'm surprised I'm still able to post here at all.

So rejoice and be glad that it was you who was that final drip responsible for the ocean to wash me out of here. :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

Ah good, it would seem that our Elected Government are getting ready to "move forward" with the desired and necessary implimentation of Web Filtering and Control, and the latest step in this plan being the obviously predictable and planned failure of "Tactical Move 1A" in relation to a Leakable Black List utilised as an aspect of ILCF (ISP Level Content Filtering).

History readily demonstrates that Western Democratic Governments tend to adopt a Hegelian approach when faced with trying to bring about outcomes that have an element of unpopularity with various vocal minorities.

That is to say, they know what they actually want to achieve so present a number of solutions knowing full well that the most objectionable will be rejected usually in favour of the least objectionable ... but that the outcomes achieved by even the least objectionable are at very least the minimum desired in the first place anyway.

So our Elected Government will now wring their hands and wail ""Oh me, oh my, our precious blacklist has been leaked - the ISPs aren't to be trusted, Big Business will fail in terms of Doing The Right Thing for the sake of our children and future, we need to legislate a Better Way", and then go on to present "Tactical Move 1B", etc, etc, until what they actually were willing to settle for (or better) is established.

Personally I reckon that our Elected Government is not only well aware of the shortcomings of ILCF as it currently is touted, but also has an array of alternative approaches armed and ready and that the method/solution that will eventually be implemented will be embraced by the opposition Government and the FF independant ... as well as most reasonable OZ citizens and parents for that matter.

Sure, it probably won't be the kind of solution I would like to see implemented, but I live in hope. It doesn't change the fact that I am firmly of the view that something desperately needs to be done to make the online world a better place. Not that the offline world is all that brilliant these days mind you ...

Anyway, my preference is that everyone and every company and business in OZ should be issued a permanent static IP and/or web-browsing personal ID that is tied in with a system of mandatory reporting by ISPs to a central Government agency (just like how banks have to report financial transaction over a certain amount ... which is quite a low amount BTW).

Obviously such reporting would involve WhiteList filtering for daily/mundane essentials ( (: ie, ebay, banking, whirlpool, google news :) ), but all else would go to be logged against your permanent record to be crunched/compared at whim and will as resources and need dictate rather than potentially contributing to a real-time page-hit response delay.

No More Secrets, let alone a secret list that will always end up leaked.

I see a number of advantages in this kind of system. The first being that internut speeds would probably improve due to folk aware of personal accountability being a little bit more careful as to how they used that resource. Another is that folk in here complaining about the lack of "due process" in terms of being filtered before they had the chance to "commit the crime" will at last get their wish of being able to be naughty , be tracked and charged, and get their day in court instead.

Obviously another is that anonymous online attacks, piracy, dissemination of pr0n and a whole bunch of other illegal and/or unsavoury/undesirable activities will take a serious hit at long last.

However, one of the best advantages I see in this kind of system involving mandatory reporting of anything that isn't on a whitelist, is that it would force parents to make damn sure they knew what their kids were getting up to on the McNet/Web and police their own households a bit better.

Isn't that what many of you have been saying needs to happen in the family home ?

Win/Win AFAIC.

Hmmmm, actually, I wouldn't be surprised if in part this kind of system IS one of the solutions our Elected Government has waiting in the wings to be announced now that the most objectionable solution has been outed (no doubt by design).

Either way, it has my vote. Could also be quite the money-spinner for someone clever enough to design it ... that is, if it hasn't already been designed and ready to be put into practice not only here in OZ, but also in the USofA and in the EU, etc.

If so, the Russian Mafia are really not going to like it. :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt31

@18492727 Mark Newton writes...
["With all that scrutiny over all that time, if there was a definitive indication of harm we'd have found it by now and it'd be common knowledge."]

We have, it is, and so I must say that you are either lying or trolling (and have herringed accordingly on the latter, although I doubt if WarT will be inclined to agree) here Mark ... and I suspect you are quite aware that you are in fact doing both.

Anyway, to keep things simple for you, here is just two names for you to digest today.

Bob Crane and John Worboys.

Then when you are done with your investigations there, head over to http://www.woai.com/content/news/newslinks/story/Porn-addiction-may-cause-brain-damage/pEv5fGR-xEu5AIrXNg5iFA.cspx

Today, more than ever, we need greater and far more strict control of unwholesome and degrading graphic information. As for the damaging effects of such information, even blind freddy could see that it is self-evident.

Except to addicts in denial out to justify and protect their supply at all costs that is ...

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt31

"We have no children in our household so why do we need a clean feed?"

For the same reason fluroide is added to your water. IE, coz on so many levels it is good for the long term welfare of both you, your local community, society and nation.

The ANZACS didn't go and sacrifice their lives and limbs for us so that lawlessness could abound; they did it so goodness and decency could be preserved. Yet the current cesspool which is the Internut is how we repay their nobility and selflessness.

So, by comparison, what are you prepared to sacrifice so that goodness and decency can be restored and preserved ?

Oh I commend you for your choice of not having children (tis virtually planned future child abuse to choose to spawn these days anyway), and for sure, my fellow supporters of the philosophies promoted at http://www.vhemt.org will be overjoyed, but what are you prepared to do in terms of "going the extra mile" for the good of humankind and the planet ?

Surely a little Internut filtering wouldn't be too much to ask, especially if it helps promote a revival of more admirable human behaviours and a turning away from that which merely serves to enslave and degrade us, hmmm ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt31

Mark Newton writes...
I expect there's room for a balanced approach.

- mark

I concur.

Nice to see some words of true wisdom from "the other side" in this debate, too.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt31

'saving' the children from obscenity just leaves them ill-prepared for the real world... better to shove it in their faces and discuss/explain it with them than shield them from it all together.

Or alternatively try and make the world a better place for young AND old by encouraging one and all to consider the higher responsibilities of true freedom and the beauty of free willed sacrifice in order to bring worthwhile benefit to others, and the recognition that sometimes the weak-willed need to be helped and guided to the better path and way by limiting their choices in relation to that which hinders and degrades.

Surely one of the higher responsibilities of the truly free would be to make every sacrifice necessary to protect the innocence of children and by doing so, also be unselfishly contributing towards creating a better future for humankind, and surely, when it comes to the weak-willed who are either unwilling or unable to make such sacrifices, when it comes to The Online World, something like ILCF needs to be implimented to make the choices and defining/dividing line so much simpler.

Sure, "worldproof the child" while there is the need to, but why not also work towards "childproofing the world" until the day is reached where no "worldproofing" is required ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool as a whim (Private Mail) to neilmc

Subject: Your attempts to go Real World on Clive Hamilton

(See: http://blog.websinthe.org/2009/02/20/where-clive-hamilton-accuses-me-of-trying-to-silence-him/ for more on the story, as well as: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1145505&p=53 and the long message from user "neilmc" detailing his planned cowardly and underhanded Real World attack on someone he does not agree with.

Start-of-quote
"From my point of view it appears that Professor Hamilton has launched a personal anti-pornography campaign and is using his University title to add weight to his agenda."

So what ? None of us are any different when it comes to linking earned titles and the like with what we do or say. When one has done the work and put themself through the discipline, they have earned the bragging rights after all.

Perhaps it is time for you to seek some professional help for your online addictions (and fear of finding it hard to feed them once ILCF is implimented) now that you have so obviously come to the sad and scary stage whereby you are prepared to try and have someone somehow moderated or shut-down by complaining to their employer and/or associates.

Quite shameful, cowardly, and despicable of you neil (and I'm sure your peers, if they be of any decent moral fibre, will agree), and in fact not much different to the alleged phonecall/message that was delivered to Geordie Guy's residence or the investigation I once had to go through all because someone who couldn't handle being found wrong on the internut, decided to try and get revenge by making a false claim to my employer at the time.

I strongly suggest you reconsider both your intent and motivations.

Feel free to post this whim into the public domain either at whirlpool or as a comment on a blog, whatever. I will be adding it to my online public accessed archives at http://derblatz.blogspot.com anyway.

regarDS
End-of-quote

EDIT: After sending the above, I also discovered that even the Hero of the Anti-ILCF brigade (Mark Newton) had this to say (and more, but I'll stick to fair-use) about neilmc's planned Real Worlding.

"Guys, I feel the need to pour some cold water on this effort to chase Hamilton through CSU. (much snipped) But in my opinion, the correct response to speech with which one violently disagrees is more speech to explain the disagreement. Trawling through the speaker's social and professional circles until you find a point where you can apply pressure to prevent further speech is just wrong."

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt28

richary writes...
Email just sent to Getup through their contact page.....

I recently donated to the campaign to place advertisements relating to the anti internet filtering scheme proposed for Australia. Like many other people I have yet to see an online ad.

Can you please advise where the money donated for this campaign has gone? Where the ads appeared and if it was spent on this campaign.

If you have diverted to something else I will be taking action via Visa who I donated through as well as the local Consumer Affairs people that you have collected money fraudelenty and I did not get what I paid for.

Regards

Richard

Take action Richary. But I did warn all you guys way back in these threads (don't bother looking for it, it was blatted and so only lives at http://derblatz.blogspot.com now:)) that giving to the left-wing environmentalist front organisation "GetUp!" was a foolish idea and that at first opportunity they would be redirecting "donations" to their more serious agendas.

See: http://derblatz.blogspot.com/2008/12/posted-dbcde-blog-site.html in which I say:

"That the likes of the putrid lefty "GetUp!" lobbying group have now chosen to now align themselves with this latest public fad topic (no doubt in order to fleece a new breed of sheep then redirect conned, uh, donated funds to their more extreme lefty agendas where-ever possible) is one of the best indications that the likes of ILCF is not only well justified but also well overdue.

Why ? Well since when did the likes of GetUp! ever get involved in supporting what is actually Good and Right for Australia ?"

and: http://derspatz.blogspot.com/2008/12/get-up-stand-up-getup-for-your-lefts.html which includes my waffle of:

"... They've now reached the stage where they are haplessly handing over cash to an Oz organization that is so Radically-Extreme-Yet-Carefully-Camouflaged-Left that they make the Evil Lefty Greens look like die Hitler-Jugend !

But Of Course I am referring to "GetUp!". If you've not heard of them before, the "GetUp!" stands for "Greenie Environmentalist Terrorists Undermining Peace!" though they would never tell you it stands for that ... but Der Apfel fällt nicht weit vom Baum, ja?

This gaily painted sinister lobbying group casts the combined shadow of every Lefty political party you could imagine, including those yet to be spawned from whatever Bog of Eternal Stench it is that continually manages to foist such wrongness upon common humanity.

Think of every issue and controversy that divides Oz and you will find the GetUp! crowd busy lobbying in favour of those on the WRONG side of the division and working towards making things even WORSE for Oz than it already is."

In short, you've all done your money when it comes to GetUp! ... but please get those complaints rolling in as I for one would love to see them investigated and shut down.

regarDS
PS: I guess that's my magic bullet used up ... I was going to save it for ILCF Implementation day, but oh well. :)

Posted @ whirlpool as a whim to Geordie Guy

Hi Geordie.

Sorry to read that you've apparently suffered real-world nutty attention for your views, but I'm glad it wasn't as bad as the kind I've suffered in the past where someone who was losing a debate with me online, used knowledge of my identity to track me down and my employment and then tried to get me fired from my job and as it was a politically sensitive Government job, an obligitory investigation was instigated which cost me shift penalties for the duration along with causing considerable inconvenience and annoyance ... but at least when I was ButOfCourse exonerated, there was then recourse for my employers to push back the other way against the frivolous complaint and the perjerous scum who chose to do such a cowardly and disgusting thing.

No small wonder that I tend to protect the IDs of my loved ones and no small wonder I prefer using the word "internut" over "internet" ... especially when it comes to describing the cowardly antics of thugs and morons sniping forth from behind anonymity and nicks, and also why I prefer to not allow comments on my main blog.

Allowing them on the blog dedicated to my posts to the whirlpool ILCF thread has earned me the following abuse from whirlpool forum users though:
http://derblatz.blogspot.com/2009/01/posted-whirlpool-as-reply-whim-to-wart.html?showComment=1233124560000#c4830164280170942494 and
http://derblatz.blogspot.com/2008/11/posted-whirlpool-ilcf-pt11.html?showComment=1233119880000#c8959391071177409818 ... which I don't see as being much different than some fanatical (inter)nut leaving abuse on your answering machine.

Nice move with the subtle cultivating of the idea that I'd be the kind of guy to deliver some sort of cowardly anon attack/abuse upon someone and in the offline world at that - I didn't figure you to be THAT much of a pragmatist, but hey, at least I know where I stand with you now. :)

Anyway, for the sake of the record, here is a sample of my voice to compare to your recording. http://derspatz.webng.com/sweet.htm

I deem this whim (just like with all others I send) to be public domain and as such it shall be added to http://derblatz.blogspot.com/ for the sake of keeping an open record.

regarDS

Posted @ ABC "Life Matters"

Posted to: http://www2b.abc.net.au/guestbookcentral/list.asp?guestbookID=359

or comment on it there by clicking: http://www2b.abc.net.au/guestbookcentral/addcomment.asp?GuestbookID=359&EntryID=2144420&view=&numtoview=&start=&sort=&filter1=&filter1val=&filter2=&filter2val=&filter3=&filter3val=&advanced=&pagestart=1

derspatz: "Clean Feed" - internut filtering

I tend to suspect that the loudest voices protesting the Government's correct and necessary efforts regarding bringing the internut into line with the laws that govern things offline, are from those with the most to lose in terms of being cut off from their chosen poisons and/or having to actually start paying for intellectual property they currently prefer to mainly steal. That such voices are also apparently in favour of protecting and promoting a system that in current form helps continue the objectifing, degradation, enslaving, and exploitation of women, really only helps prove how necessary Government intervention has become, and not before its time either.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24. A Fare Thee Well ?

DerSpatz is likely one of several people who have watched the debate, have strong feelings about content on the web and how it should be dealt with, and enjoy some of the heat that comes with taking a stance against a popular position.

This is almost trolling but not really, and it's important to make the distinction because otherwise the word troll becomes a cliché and starts to lose it's meaning.

Trolls usually enter conversations with the express purpose of posting inflammatory, off-topic or irrelavent messages. DerSpatz isn't really inflammatory (for the express sake of it), usually sticks somewhat on topic (just on an indefensible side of it) and generally speaking you can't accuse him of raising irrelavent points because despite his abject wrongness, he presumably does actually feel this way even if it raises questions about how far behind he is on his brain bills.

Cheers Geordie, but too little too late, and don't expect this last reply of mine in the ILCF forum thread to remain for very long before a certain somewhat over-zealous (to say the least) Mod at last gets to see the "perma-ban" it has so obviously been itching to see dropped upon me for for some time now.

You're wrong about most things when it comes to me (for example, I've been protecting family identities for decades, and I *have* had serious offline world harrasment in the past in response to things conveyed online, so who wouldn't want to shield family from such "internuts" – and why should family have to suffer or risk suffering such attentions because of a rep I choose for myself online ?) but hey, the topic is ILFC and not derspatz so moving right along ...

So, I thought I'd leave the ILCF and Broadband area with a message more acceptable to the anti-filter crew (even though it will soon to be blatted out of view in here anyway ... but just like with everything else I've ever posted in this forum, it will remain in the public record at http://derblatz.blogspot.com ) and I'll not use the word "internut" for the rest of this fare thee well.

Ok, the message. I'll start with a quote. It is from a 1999 speech delivered by someone I've supped, sipped, and socialised with (clang – sound of name being dropped) on various occasions over the last couple of decades, with the last occasion also shared with "richary" who has been a regular participant in this ILFC thread.

The speech could have been written for today which just goes to show how little has changed in the last 10 years since its writer delivered it at the Perth anti-censorship protest in May 28th, 1999.

You can find it here: http://www.efa.org.au/Campaigns/may28/perth/kh.html and it begins with:

"For some, the issue is free speech – not freedom to do illegal things, but the freedom to download and post to the Net anything that is legal in other media." – Kimberley Heitman, Chair, Electronic Frontiers Australia

Wow ... look how far we have come in 10 years. (rolls eyes)

Ok WarT, do your worst. I've fought the good fight against the unjust and underhanded and so But Of Course will will make the standard and necessary (if not typical) claim that my forced departure into the wilderness is from much higher moral ground than your own, and allow the next scape-goat to step up to face the fury and denials.

regarDS
PS: To the relative few of you who have ever received a whim from me, I deem such whims to be public domain and in no way private property.

Posted @ whirlpool as a reply whim to WarT

The following reply whim to WarT is in response to the SOQ/EOQ whim I just received delivering the reality (hey, we ALL know where this is going and what the outcome will be) that my participation in the ILCF thread is about to be permanently prevented.

Dear WarT has been The Mod who has inflicted prolly 99% of the "blats" (message deletions) that have been preserved to the public record in this blog instead. That kind of attention from a single Mod to one user should surely be cause for concern by the whirlpool owners and the rest of the Mod team, so I can't help but wonder if WarT is nearing the end of duties and responsibilities in that regard.

Anyway, here is The Whim. :)

SOQ
You've come to our attention as requiring some more moderation than the average user in Broadband, just to let you know that further moderation of your posts in there will result in a Forum Ban. You'll be able to contribute in other parts of Whirlpool; just not Broadband.
EOQ

Sure, whatever and thanks for the heads up, but you and I are prolly just never going to get on are we, WarT. Obviously this puts me at a disadvantage in terms of postings, but on the higher ground when it comes to moral behaviour so I guess this must be a case of a win for us both ... so it ain't all bad. :)

Anyway, that is quite a list of personal attention you've delivered my way in this particular topic so there is no point either of us pretending that no bias is involved here, nor in any way any kind of balanced and fair moderation.

Tis plain to see which side you are on when it comes to the future of the internut, but quite amusing to see just what you are prepared to do in order to protect that which is precious to you.

Tis also always nice to meet another pragmatist willing to make the ends justify the means even if we are batting for different teams.

Your method and mode of moderation will remain a matter of public record anyway (including this message), and it will be interesting to one day learn how you are viewed by your your fellow moderating team and those who have entrusted you to the task at whirlpool.

Until then,

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

By the way, the term "those of us" insinuates that there is more than one person using the term, when I would be stunned to find out there were more than just yourself, and floored if I found out there were enough to overflow a Hyundai Excel.
Settle, petal.

(various links proving a wide and varied use of the term "internut" deleted just in case the content changes) ;)

Etc.

Time to pick yourself up and upgrade to a People Mover from that Hyundai ...

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

No doubt in the long run I won't care what pro-censorship people think of me because we'll have defeated the plan for another decade and can move onto other parts of the EFA agenda.

10 years is such a short time span in the scheme of things from my perspective, but do pass on a "Sparrow says hello" to The Heitman from me when next you confer ... then even more illumination is sure to follow.

In the meantime, I think we both know that the censorship of the web is destined to continue and increase – and for most of us it is never going to be a problem either.

But hey, whatever pays your salary, eh ?

regarDS

Posted @ forum.behindbigbrother.com

I'm including the following post of mine from a different forum area to save certain whirlpoolers the trouble of searching it out. :)

SOQ
Obviously my views come from the position that "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", and carry on from there to include the obvious logical conclusion that since God created, then there was a reason for doing so and an interest (and even a vested one at that) in it. My views come from the position that our bodies are merely temporary vehicles to be driven by something that has been designed to out-live the flesh in its current corruptible form.

From there I move on to Objective Morality ... that being a code/key to the best life possible, for our flesh and that which drives it as provided by the one who designed it.

In contrast to that, in these disturbing so called "modern" times, we have generations of humanity who have been brought up on the nonsense of there being no Creator or point to life but rather we are the accidental product of non-living sludge that somehow became life in the billions of different forms it takes now.

We are taught that not only is the no point, craft, nor design to life, but also nothing we do during our time alive actually means anything anyway and we are only fooling ourselves if we think it does for when we die we become nothing but a memory soon to be forgotten and there is nothing beyond the flesh and the materialistic and sensations it can experience.

Similarly we are taught that because there is no God, no Creator behind creation, that Objective Morality is nothing but a lie made up by certain humans in order to control others; a lie that should be abandoned in favour of Subjective Morality ... that everyone is both right and free to make up whatever rules and ways of being they choose because there is no such thing as right or wrong and even if there was it just doesn't matter because there is no point to life anyway and everything finishes with the grave.

Out of the foundationless mire of Subjective Morality you get the kind of tripe that is the dualistic (Kinsey) scaled pendulum named "sexuality" that seeks to divide people up along a two dimensional grading ranging from "hetero" to "homo".

And what a load of misery that kind of thinking brings ... but hey, once folk have abandoned knowledge of the Creator and the Objective Morality/Code for the Best Life possible and instead start believing that there is no point to life and near everything they are is because of the genetic makeup of their flesh, then it is no great surprise that they should start to claim they have no choice when it comes to a whole bunch of stuff, when the fact is they have every choice available under the sun but merely don't want to be held accountable for the poor choices they do decide upon.

Pardon me if I prefer the truth of the matter and choose to share it with my son ... anyway, who are you to judge if your lives and views are built upon subjectivity rather than objectivity ?

Subjectivity simply has no fixed foundation to measure from nor absolutes to deliver !

So, just like I tell numba1son, I'll tell you; Choose whatever you like, but "own your own shit" !

As for "offensive". Well as a wise guy once said: "There is nothing more offensive than the brutal truth delivered brutally to those who don't want to hear it".

Oh wait, that was me: http://forum.behindbigbrother.com/sh...1&postcount=37 :)

But Of Course, according to those embracing Subjective Morality over Objective Morality, I'm neither right nor wrong with any of this anyway.

So what's the problem ?EOQ

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

The New York Times quotes me, you quote yourself.

Well, at least we can see by this how seriously you want to be taken and how important the opinions of your peers are to you, but no need for you to make this mistake that everyone else wants to be measured in such ways – or that it actually counts for all that much in the long run.

You also don't need to make the mistake that my use of the apt descriptor "internut" has much to do with the framework and technology. Obviously I'm virtually always making reference to what it has largely become in terms of it's users.

Still a bit of a LOL that you are asking me to censor myself so that you don't have to get offended yet at the same time you are objecting to those of us who are calling for the same sort of thing for the internut re: a "clean feed" and ILCF.

Perhaps the New York Times and those who think lofty thoughts about you might be able to bring enlightenment and illumination as to how most people see that kind of thinking ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

I've tried to explain to you before just how nauseatingly condescending your use of the neologism "internut" is" ... I'm going to just outright ask you to stop being so derisive and objectionable.

So let me get this straight. In a forum topic on the subject of "clean feed"ing the internut via an ILCF you want me to stop using a word that has been in my online and offline vocabulary from long before I even knew you existed let, alone the topic of ILCF ?

Kinda hypocritical of ya if not ironic, isn't it ?

If the truth behind the word "internut" is so offensive to you perhaps you should first question how seriously you are taking this ever evolving communications media, and how much in denial you are about how "nutty" so much of it is, and even how you yourself fit the description due to your lack of humour in relation to the obvious reality of this communications media. Then you should either build a bridge and get over it, or do what I get told in here to do on a regular basis – ie, switch off the TV, install a filter, or just don't go there.

The world and the internut is full of all sort of nuts (and sure, I don't care about being judged by the same filter) and I doubt if you are in any way exception, so perhaps the sooner you learn to recognise and laugh at that, the better it will be for all of us, hmmm ?

Here, perhaps this may help bring about that better understanding.

http://derspatz.blogspot.com/2008/11/internut-by-any-other-name.html

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

Big brother filter plan insults parents:
Underlying the Rudd Government's plan to screen the internet is an offensive message: that parents cannot be trusted to mind their children online.

Truth hurts, but better parents in denial be offended and the population delivered up a reasonable proximity of a "clean feed" (by ILCF or any other means proved necessary), AFAIC.

Oh, and speaking of truth hurting, here is a quote for ya ...

"There is nothing more offensive than the brutal truth delivered brutally to those who don't want to hear it ... except for willfully ignorant brutes who prefer and promote a lie."

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

I'm totally alarmist. I picked up a pair of tongs on the weekend that had been resting partially on the barbie plate, my alarmism was audiable for about a block

LOL. Future policy direction. Social event filter.

Evidence and example of carelessness and a lack of self control.

Justification for the implementation of measures not relient upon such short comings and slip-ups regardless of provocations and circumstantial stimuli, so that no one need suffer the unwelcome outcomes in such a way.

In other words, another reason why the world needs a "clean feed" when it comes to the internut and why it should at least begin with ILCF.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

are you saying that stifling political dissent through the guise of protecting us from ourselves is pragmatic?

Sure, if you like, but in this particular case I was saying that my quoting of an article which you chose to claim was a breach of © was an example of pragmatism on my part.

IE, I really couldn't care if you thought it a breach of © or not, but even if it was, my view is that the ends justifies the means ... for after all, I'm just an (what was it ?) "annoying snot", eh ?

But seriously, don't expect me to get all fanatical about either protecting the internut in its current form OR seeing it turned into what it should be. It just isn't important enough to me to care all that much, especially when at the end of the day, it is FANATICISM which is the true enemy.

Such as the kind being birthed in various ILCF opponents in this very forum.

AFAIC, not only is "free speech" a BFW (cheers TISM) that certainly is not under the slightest bit of unjustified threat, but also the internut is far from being the be all and end all of such an over-rated and so misused animal.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

main requirements for a deductible gift recipient is that it must be based in Australia (with some limited exceptions).

Such as those which also have Oz based offices and/or approval by Oz ATO. My receipts indicate such approval.

I can help put you in touch with such charities if you are interested in helping our ally Israel out in such a way.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

Hypocrisy aside, calls by authoritarian regimes to curb vulgarity are often a smoke screen for the stifling of political dissent.

from derspatz' very own, copyright infringing post...

Isn't pragmatism wonderful ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

I put my money towards benefiting Israel over Oz anyway, and by doing so am helping benefit all of humanity in the long run.

cmon ppl .. he's no more than trolling for a laugh for his own amusment

I can assure you (blat) that every year I give many thousands of dollars to worthy Israel Based charities including for care packages for their army. I've been doing this on a monthly basis for years, and the Oz ATO even gives me a tax deducation for doing so.

It is no laughing matter, and the more of us who similarly start helping Israel in such financial ways, the sooner this whole mess ala the world the way it currently is, will be over and done with and we can then get on with the Real Life.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

( @ ) Lillary ( @ ) writes...
derspatz writes...I put my money towards benefiting Israel over Oz anyway, and by doing so am helping benefit all of humanity in the long run.

And that, folks, says it all doesn't it?

Etc. Awww, someone just needed a scapegoat to kick after all.

Hey, I'll be the joker to your batman ... you complete me, Lillary.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

From: http://www.newsweek.com/id/181312
24/01/09

SOQ
China kicked off the New Year with another crackdown on the Internet. A government-supported entity—the Internet Illegal Information Reporting Center, tasked with finding and fighting online content that violates the law—began by informing 19 popular Web sites, including Google and Baidu, China's two leading search engines, that they contain "vulgar content that violates social morality and damages the physical and mental health of youths." Only a few days later, they expanded their blacklist to 91 sites, including MSN and MySpace, demanding that they all take action to remove the offensive content. By last week more than 1,250 Web sites had been closed down and 41 people arrested. The crackdown singled out galleries of scantily clad women on tiexue.com and videos on vodone.com, as well as Google searches with links to anything that could be deemed racy. On the same day, People's Daily, an official outlet, posted paparazzi photos of the Chinese celebrity Zhang Ziyi in a bikini at the beach. The Web site of Xinhua News Agency has also run a slide show called "China's Hottest Babes."

Hypocrisy aside, calls by authoritarian regimes to curb vulgarity are often a smoke screen for the stifling of political dissent. Iran recently included several sites critical of the government on a blacklist of more than 100,000 pornographic sites, and a study by the OpenNet Initiative, a university consortium that tracks Internet filtering around the globe, found that Vietnam censors politically sensitive content along with obscenity. China's current crackdown is no exception. Bullog.cn, an edgy Chinese bloglike platform that often irked the Chinese authorities by reporting on controversial events like protests against new chemical plants, is one openly political victim of the current purges. Rebecca MacKinnon, an expert on the Chinese Internet at the University of Hong Kong, writes that "historically in China … the technology used to censor porn has ended up being used more vigorously to censor political content," and this appears to be the case again now. The thaw in anticipation of the Olympics, in which politically damaging sites like those of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch were allowed to publish unhindered, may now be nearing its end.

Beijing is expanding controls ahead of several inconvenient anniversaries. It's been 50 years since the Tibetan uprising, 20 years since the bloodshed of Tiananmen Square and 60 years since the founding of the People's Republic of China. An immediate cause of the crackdown might be the launch of Chapter 08, an appeal for democratic freedom by numerous Chinese intellectuals a few weeks ago, which engendered widespread and, so far, uncontrollable online discussions.

Indeed, Beijing's sudden toughness comes just as the Internet is becoming an effective tool for exposing possible government corruption. Squads of Internet vigilantes called "human-flesh search engines" use the Web to identify and terrorize leaders whom they believe have overstepped their authority or good judgment. When Zhou Jiugeng, a real-estate official from Nanjing, appeared in an official photograph wearing a Vacheron Constantin watch, which retails for $15,000, bloggers did some digging. They reportedly found that Zhou also drove a Cadillac to work and smoked Nanjing 95 Imperial cigarettes, which cost $20 a pack. This online attention and widespread calls for his resignation triggered an official investigation into Zhou's affairs in late December.

Earlier that month, Lin Jiaxiang, the Communist Party secretary of Shenzhen's Marine Affairs Bureau, was fired after being accused of assaulting a young girl at a restaurant. The Chinese Netizens tracked his identity, circulated a video of him and the girl and demanded an investigation. In another episode, two Chinese officials left receipts from a costly tour of North America on a subway in Shanghai, which wound up being published online, to general outrage. The officials were promptly fired.

The government's methods of identifying dissent have gotten more sophisticated in the past year. Rather than having to rely on search queries, censors have begun to employ private firms ("censorship entrepreneurs") to perform data-mining operations to identify dissent. The firms are then free to demand that Web sites remove the offensive content. TRS Information Technology, for instance, claims to be a leader in the fields of "information retrieval, content management and text mining." What this means in practice is that TRS provides various Chinese government agencies (mostly police authorities) with technology to monitor online discussions that may pose a threat to the regime. In a recent interview in the Financial Times, TRS's marketing director took special pride in having installed such systems at eight police stations in Shanghai, noting that now the work formerly done by 10 Internet police offers could be done by one. TRS, which was founded in 1993, now employs more than 200 people.
EOQ

Oh, and Lillary, you go 'girl' ... tis all "win-win" to me however you choose to deal with ILCF. I put my money towards benefiting Israel over Oz anyway, and by doing so am helping benefit all of humanity in the long run.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

P.J.C...Belgium wants in on European web blocklist

The world has gone stark raving mad!.

No, it is just a case of the usually silent moral majority being wakened from their relative slumber and at last getting the pendulum to swing the other way.

For too long too many of us have sat back and allowed the immoral and evil doers who share our oxygen to get away with abusing freedom of choice by choosing to do what is bad and negative for/to our communities, culture, societies and civilisation.

For too long we've allowed wickedness to increase unchecked so that instead of being able to allow our children to play unfettered and free from sun-up to sun-down, we are now too scared to let them out of our sight for more than 30 seconds.

For too long we've had to make concessions that at any moment can expose any of us by pure accident to that which we would rather have lived an entire lifetime without witnessing.

For too long we've given chances and second chances and tried and hoped to reason the best way forward to bring about the best world possible, yet for too long we've been forced to accept virtually without complaint or recourse things that are basically intolerable as well as historically part of the ruin of any culture or civilisation.

Well folks, your greed and lack of control has done it to yourselves yet again for at last the tide is turning, the pendulum is reversing its swing and there is a ground swell movement to roll back the philosphies and practices of the depraved world you want to inflict upon us all to our inevitable judgement and destruction.

And not before time.

Yup, I'm busy putting my time and my money towards a bringing to an end of the kind of world you want, and guess what, according to the promises and prophecies (if you prefer) that continue to prove themselves accurate with every passing day, not only is my time and money being well spent, but also that new and better world is eventually going to be achieved ... and not only that, but the likes of ILCF will not be needed in that world because no one will even dream of creating or promoting the kinds of things that would justify it.

The world has not gone mad. It has just finally got angry enough about the way the world has gone for so long to at last start trying to do the right thing about it.

ILCF is obviously not the perfect solution ... but it is a start in the right direction until certain people start choosing to make righteousness and doing the right thing by their neighbour a priority again rather than the base selfishness that currently is their norm.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24

There seems to be more sex o TV and over the telephone.

Is someone going to put in place a mandatory filter for these ?

As a shift worker regularly confronted with having to change the TV channel to ABC thanks to all the degrading, insulting, and bile inducing "FLIRT" and "Girls gone wild" etc etc etc ads that come on after midnight on the commercial channels, I for one certainly hope so.

OTOH, at least channel surfing in Oz isn't as dangerous as it is in France ...

At least the inevitable death of newsprint is going to bring a relative end to the death of trees used to provide "personals"/prostitution pages.

Google News is my only "newspaper" these days, and the sooner the majority of us similarly make that change, the better AFAIC.

In a "clean feed" ILCF treated internut, that is ...

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt23 to mod WarT

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1123716&r=17830112#r17830112
--

Interesting. So it is now deemed "off topic" to directly quote (and ONLY directly quote) a previously posted letter from Senator Conroy regarding ILCF in an area dedicated to talking about ILCF in direct response to someone asking for an update about that very topic re: politics of what is going on ?

regarDS

(The above whim is in response to WarT's blatting of the previously listed blog entry reproduction of a post to whirlpool. Me thinks WarT doesn't like me much and is looking for any excuse to put my blat count up so that I can be sent on another holiday from the forum ...

What do you think ?

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt23

Does anyone have the lowdown on the current state of the filtering trials? Not just the technical details but the politics...

Where is Conroy coming from?

Partly from here:

"Freedom of speech is fundamentally important in a democratic society. For many years however, most Australias have accepted that there is some material which is not acceptable, particularly for children.

The genesis of this is in civil society where social conflict is governed by the imposition if rules that restrain citizens from harming one another and society as a whole accepts that the public interest requires that those rules are enforced.

The Seoul Declaration for the Future of the Internet Economy states that participating economies agree to 'Ensure a trusted Internet-based environment which offers protection to individuals, especially minors and other vulnerable groups'.

The existing ACMA blacklist is a list of internet web pages which are defined as 'prohibited' under Australian legislation. The list has been in place since 2000 and currently contains around 1300 URLs.

The ACMA blacklist is developed by complaints by the public about online content to the ACMA hotline. ACMA does not arbitrarily assess and classify content. Online content is assessed in accordance with the National Classification Scheme."

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt23

those offended can block their ears / turn off the radio/tv/pc and find something else to entertain them.

... and we should just hold our breath whenever we encounter smokers, too ? (rolls eyes).

The reality is we should not have to be confronted with the deplorable and immoral in the first place.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt23

> Communications are Commonwealth acts.

Fair enough, but isn't the definition of child porn different for each state? Or is there also a federal definition?

Nah, more like for each country – which is something else needing addressing in the long run.

To play it safe I propose that come the "New World Order" and "Global Community" being called for by everyone from Bush to Obama to Blair to Brown (etc, etc), the age of adulthood and sexual consent all over the globe should be bumped back up to 21 again (from where it was for much of the Western World in the 1950s and early 60s) which would no doubt render most existing pr0n as being CP with a stroke of a pen.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt23

"You wish to restrict the very thing that is vastly improving our society for the better?"

Not in the slightest - it is the very thing I've been consistently arguing for because after all, for a successful and functioning society to remain that way requires continually RESTRICTING in various ways that which is detrimental to it.

Permitting "anything goes" does not a successful society make, so in order to improve our society for the better it only stands to reason that restrictions and regulations continue to be brought to bear upon virtually everything our society uses, which obviously must include our communication systems which are obviously currently able to be grossly mis-used ... and to the obvious detriment of us all at that when one considers the ancient observation and promise that "righteousness exalts a nation but sin is a reproach to any people", and all that.

In short, I'm all for making Oz a more righteous nation and society and for attempts to be made to prevent the spread and flow of that which poisons and corrupts our society (and clearly ILCF is one such attempt), but I'm also all for that which might also see Krudd's government ousted after but a single term ... I'll accept either as A Win but would prefer to have both. :)

I fail to see how the banning and/or prevention of sharing by our communication systems every kind of pr0n and unauthorised (c) content could be anything other than BENEFICIAL to our nation and society, let alone do anything other than IMPROVE the general speed and family friendliness of The Net.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt23

Mark Newton writes...
"It is a fundamental human right to have access to food, water and other necessities of life. You don't have to observe any kind of responsibility to qualify for that right."

Etc. Dunno where on earth you think this might be happening, but it certainly isn't in Oz, Mark. Last time I looked, if you wanna continue to get a Centrelink benefit then you've also got to prove that you're keeping up your end of the bargain re: your "mutual obligations".

We don't have the right to eat what we have neither earned nor been given and to do so is generally classed as theft and/or trespass and not much has changed in that regard since the days of Moses, etc. Sure, our society charitably will ensure various of us receive certain things here and there gratis temporarily in many cases and even permanently in other cases but generally there is an understanding that the receipient should be trying to get themselves to the stage where they earn their daily bread again instead of forever depending on the rest of us. How many societies do you know of that enjoy and welcome free-loaders forever bludging ?

Rights and Responsibilities intrinsically linked again, and in this case (as is usual) a greater expectation and importance on Responsibilities. ie, the responsibility of those in a position of being able to help to help and the helpless to turn that help into self-help. In fact, "Rights" barely gets a peep in that Very Real reality.

No one has a right to just jump in a vehicle and just drive all over the place any way they choose. What they do have The Right to do is sit the medicals and tests, learn the rules, and prove that they are aware of their road responsibilities. The presumption is But Of Course that they are then going to prefer those responsibilities but either way, "Rights" barely figures in that either.

This sort of thing is what I want to see happening for your precious internut (which is a convenience and a luxury but hardly something that could be deemed a necessity let alone a right, yet certainly something that comes with a whole load of associated responsibility) and I believe that the likes of ILCF is but a small stepping stone in getting across that necessary river.

To date ILCF has been sold badly but I reckon it and greater than it would be loudly demanded by the Oz majority if it was tied in with the reality of providing a lasting True Clean Feed rather than some twaddle about stopping CP.

And this is another reason why I continue to support it.

Another reason is because I don't want Oz to become like France.

And yes, I admit that another reason is that I hope the issue as it currently is helps see the ALP kicked out of government for a long time to come. :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt22

"DS...... if it upsets you so much, just stop looking at the stuff. Solved."

Mark: He'll stop watching as soon as the French TV guys untie him from his chair :-)

Heh. How goes our continuing plan to discredit and get the ALP thrown out of government next election, brother ? Is this still something we are united in ?

Anyway, aside from that particular positive that ILCF can help deliver, why should I or anyone else have to be careful how we channel surf on TV or net surf on the McWeb ?

I'd rather have a Clean TV feed and Clean Internut Feed and not have to worry ... and what sort of parent wouldn't say the same ?

As for the likes of those who say things like "don't look and you won't have to be offended", then isn't that part of the reason so many areas of this planet are grubby polluted places these days ?

My guess is those who say such things rarely bother to try and keep their own community or city clean by picking up other thoughtless folk's rubbish but instead are prone to tipping engine oil down stormwater drains and playing their home theatre rigs at painful volumes late at night with the windows open.

ie, the kind of people who really only care about themselves.

Surely, in terms of the "Golden Rule" and all that, we all have a duty to ensure that our neighbours are not only discouraged if not prevented from harming themselves, but also prevented from bringing harm to the community let alone society in the long run ?

There we are, back to responsibilities and rights again. :)

Sure, ILCF is a bit like closing the barn door after the horses have bolted when one considers the depraved and embarrasing humiliations that are being inconsiderately broadcast into the ether on public TV in some countries, but hey, at least any Real Intelligence "out there" can now also see that at least SOME of us are trying to right the wrongs and that not all earth types are so easy and with strange inclinations. ;)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt22

"Who would have thought the government's proposed Internet filtering scheme would bring together so many disparate groups all united in their opposition to mandatory censorship?
"
http://www.techworld.com.au/article/273031/strange_bedfellows_sex_it_unite_stop_net_censorship

I for one would happily vote for a Government which would seek to outlaw/make illegal all "X" rated material in Oz as well as make an "X" rating a more likely classification to be handed out. Same vote for a Government which made any kind of "sex industry" in Oz more difficult for anyone to become involved in (or make money out of) and brought greater penalties and punishments upon the customers of prostitutes rather than the prostitutes themselves - ie, reduce the need for supply by making the demand too unattractive.

Heck, put it all off-shore and don't let those who go off-shore for it back into the country, AFAIC ... and I bet I'm far from being alone with that sentiment.

Interesting the kinds of groups that get listed in that article and fascinating that they should come out into the light of day when the chosen lifestyles and/or questionable livelihoods are confronted with the potential of a "CLEAN FEED" and "FILTERED INTERNET" and it says a lot about the kind of Oz they selfishly want to inflict upon us all.

Yet I bet most of them prefer to drink filtered and clean water when they aren't busy trying to turn Oz into a revist of the last days of Pompeii, etc.

Ah well, at very least the threat of ILCF has helped draw a new line in the sand and made it easier to determine on yet another level just where the morality of Oz currently is and where it is heading.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt22

derspatz: So, have the ILCF trials commenced yet ? If so, any reported results as yet ?

Mark: Nope, Dave. Total failure. They collapsed in a heap in the week before Christmas, and Conroy said they were being pushed back to mid January.

Ah good, so I didn't miss anything interusting. :)

Mark: Here's my wrap-up of December for you, hope it's helpful :-)
/forum-replies.cfm?t=1109992&p=35#r694

Cheers Mark. Nothing like a beastly excursion to the Northern Hemisphere for a few weeks to remind us of how good we actually have it back here in Oz, eh ? Almost enough to make one want to make a small fire of one's passports (yeah, I've got a couple of different kinds) in the car park of the internutional airport once the final leg of the long-haul and the customs gauntlets and queues are over, hmmm ?

derspatz: I certainly was not very happy to discover the kind of stuff that was broadcast on public access French TV after midnight.

Mark: And yet, French society appears to have continued unabated along a slowly but steadily improving cant for hundreds, nay, thousands of years.

Surely you jest, oi ? Dunno what you can find all that advanced about that particular fragment of Ancient Rome which has given us the likes of Donatien Alphonse François de Sade and his sadism, madness, perversions, and the diseases they helped spread, or Ernest Duchesne (the true) discoverer of penicillin – used to combat sufferers of certain ails spread by the likes of the aforementioned, or Joseph-Ignace Guillotin and his development of the amputation device that bears his name and was deemed so popular by the common masses that they used it to amputate the heads of some of the very people who gave them their precious revolution and alleged "freedom" in the first place ?

Don't you find that particular society to generally consist of a humourless bunch who take themselves far too seriously (especially when it comes to food and its preparation and their language) and who are so obsessed with things digestive that one of their number going by the name of Marc-Antoine Jacoud, actually invented a device whereby a seated user can return under pressure the discarded remnants of recently digested to where it was just exited ... this time as a watery soup to be dribbled out again and again (apparently) ?

It is bad enough that their word for the affirmative has been incorporated into the Oz bogan Oz day chant, and don't get me started on the need for queues virtually everywhere you go in their capital. So sorry, no sale on the "steadily improving" thang – I just can't see it.

derspatz: The trouble is, morally even such things so easily judged as "pointless" on one level, should still be attempted even if doomed to failure, yes ?

Mark: Ah, yes: The Alston, "Even if we don't succeed we should still make the attempt" defense.

AFAIC, as long as The Righteous still attempt to be and promote righteousness, hope remains for mankind. I wouldn't know what the minimum level of the same is required in order to avoid judgement from a different source (looks up), but if memory serves me correctly it used to be 5 to a town or something like that ...

Oh, and to answer someone elses question, yes, I am still in support of ILCF.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt22

Just got back from 4 weeks in the UK/EU and away from things online and notice this topic has incremented 6 digits in my absence – far too much for me to try and catch up on.

So, have the ILCF trials commenced yet ? If so, any reported results as yet ?

Although I'm happy to discover that my comment to the DBCDE site was published while I was away ( see:
http://www.dbcde.gov.au/communications_for_business/industry_development/digital_economy/future_directions_blog/topics/minister_tanners_welcome/derspatz ) I certainly was not very happy to discover the kind of stuff that was broadcast on public access French TV after midnight.

Let's just say that I've never encountered anything like it by either accident or design in over two decades of "online" participation, and yes, just like with every other kind of pr0n I've ever been exposed to, I've "been harmed" by it.

Thus, my current view as I type is that perhaps it is now totally pointless to try and control/moderate the internut when some countries are apparently broadcasting free to air certain kinds of information that should never have ever been imagined let alone filmed.

I will agree that implementing ILCF could be deemed akin to the tale of the dutch boy plugging up a hole in a dyke (see: http://www.thehollandring.com/hans-brinker-story.shtml ) but with a new twist being that the waters are already about to pour over the very top due to a storm surge anyway.

Pointless.

The trouble is, morally even such things so easily judged as "pointless" on one level, should still be attempted even if doomed to failure, yes ?

regarDS