Goodbye. I'll miss you.

Status
Not open for further replies.
" I don't want to give in. I won't give up. They haven't broken my spirit. Within each one of us there is a inch of integrity, of hope, of will. We must NEVER lose that inch. Within it, we are free."

As much as I believe in that post of mine, it's not a saying that I came up with on my own. I took it from a graphic novel called "V for Vendetta". It's a book that everyone who posts here would be interested in. You should be able to find a copy online or at your local bookstore. They are also making a movie about it. Go to the official website here and watch the trailers especially the second one:

www.vforvendetta.com
 
Highland Ranger said:
I've been offended since the 80's . . . .
Click to expand...


I was annoyed BY the 80's....

In fact I know that my purpose on this planet is to simply annoy as many poeple as possible.

My goal is to annoy everyone on this planet. (Then move onto the next one.....) :neener:
 
Coronach said:
The latter part is standard in online communication, but the former part is going to be hard to establish except in the most clear-cut cases. Posting to a message board ostensibly to communicate with other people will not cut it, methinks. Sending an email to a certain person saying "YOU CAN'T STOP ME FROM TALKING TO YOU, SARAH!" will, but probably only after Sarah has made it very clear that she does not ever plan on taking you back and never wants to hear from you again, even after you learn how to shut off your capslock. In other words, Hardin is probably safe, and so is everyone else here.
Click to expand...


The only problem with that is PFA's and Restraining Orders already cover e-mail, so what's this law really for then?


I think we're correct to be a little leery of this, but I really don't see the Supreme Court allowing an abuse of this to stand, because it affects the 1st Amendment, which they protect to a fault as long as campaign finance is not involved.

Mike
Click to expand...

I pretty much agree, and I hope we're correct.
 
Janitor said:
Yup. You basically have it right. DOD started the DARPA net project to connect all the .mil and .gov defense research sights. It slowly morphed into the Internet as University and commercial (network) research facilities were brought online.

Then, the greencard lawyers Kanter & Siegal invented SPAM on Usenet in the late '80s and things started to go all to he11 here.
-
Click to expand...

Thanks.
 
"Too late, V4Vendetta, too late.

Your willingness to compromise has offended me"

I'm not compromising. I've decided to stay. After reading my own post on page 2 about "the one inch", I've realiazed that to not stay would be giving up. THAT, I won't do.

P.S. If I go down you all go with me:evil: .

P.P.S. Not really. I'll go down alone. :(
 
Lupinus by being offended by V4Vendetta for now not taking actions to protect himself from offending me has now offended me!
 
Far be it from me to tell you what to read and who to listen to but there are better sources of information than Alex Jones.He takes a kernel of truth,smothers it in paranoia and wraps it up in a tortilla of hysteria -served hot and fresh to you.

The point of this isn't so that it's illegal to engage in reasonable discourse,up to and including questioning someone's gender identity for owning a 9mm on THR but rather it's aimed against the PEN15 GROW spam emails sent to you from Jimmy P Rockbottom with a message header of Hey,great news!

There's still time to build a bunker in the hills and get off the grid but pretty soon the JBT's will start monitoring semaphore and smoke signals so no communication at all will be safe.:fire:
 
"There's still time to build a bunker in the hills "

How do you do that? Is there a special company for that? :confused:
 
The only problem with that is PFA's and Restraining Orders already cover e-mail, so what's this law really for then?
Click to expand...
They're probably after spammers who have been told that their communication annoys the people they are spamming. Also, some telecommunications harassment statutes are written in ways that email is not covered. Restrining orders are, obviously, more flexible.

I dunno how successful they'll be at getting spammers with this, though...the intent angle is the problematic one, and I don't see any appellate court allowing the gov't to prosecute communication that just HAPPENS to offend. I mean, really. When I send out my mass emailings about enlarging your penis, I know that I am just trying to provide a product to the masses. Same with my communications about busty lesbian sorority girls gone wild. I dunno about anyone else.

Mike ;)
 
Lupinus by being offended by V4Vendetta for now not taking actions to protect himself from offending me has now offended me!
Click to expand...
I have no clue what that means. Therefor it has offended me and you will be Vens co-defendant :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JShirley
  • Locked
Goodbye to a friend
2 3
Replies
71
Views
8K
rustysragsinc
R
S
  • Locked
If you like civil asset forfeiture...
Replies
8
Views
498
oldfart
O
J
  • Locked
Sex Offender's Homes to be Searched without Warrant Whenever a Child is Missing
2 3 4 5
Replies
102
Views
3K
DRZinn
D
A
  • Locked
Shoes Are All That I'll Need
Replies
3
Views
456
modifiedbrowning
M
T
  • Locked
Congress may make ISPs snoop on you
Replies
16
Views
815
PinnedAndRecessed
P
Back
Top