• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New York lawmakers propose ban on anonymous online comments [W: 68]

Thunder said:
um...didn't Demolition Man take place in the fictional megalopolis of San-Angeles?

:doh
Click to expand...

That may have been the name. His point was the city was crime free....until wesley snipes came out of course, and that is was crime free because of the government over controlling the citizens in every aspect of their lives.
 
Thunder said:
I remain anonymous on this forum for two reasons:

1. I have already been stalked on another forum, where someone posted my name, a picture of me, and the agency I work for.

2. Calls for violence against me have been made on this forum.

Thats why I stay anonymous.

However, if this law passes in the New York State Legislaure (not New York City as someone suggested), I will become unanonymous.
Click to expand...

That's why you should be able to be anonymous.
 
muciti said:
That may have been the name. His point was the city was crime free....until wesley snipes came out of course, and that is was crime free because of the government over controlling the citizens in every aspect of their lives.
Click to expand...

its a made up story. fiction.

pretty much a comic book on screen.

I'm unimpressed by the silly comparison. Let me know when New York requires folks to no longer have sex.
 
rocket88 said:
That's why you should be able to be anonymous.
Click to expand...

I have a middle-way.

all internet forums or websites where folks become members and post comments, must get a copy of ones driver's license, that can be verified.

that way, if a member actually does engage in stalking/threats, that forum can be contacted by the police to get the person's name & address.
 
if anonymous campaign contributions are free speech, then anonymous speech is free speech. this idea won't stand up in court.
 
Thunder said:
I have a middle-way.

all internet forums or websites where folks become members and post comments, must get a copy of ones driver's license, that can be verified.

that way, if a member actually does engage in stalking/threats, that forum can be contacted by the police to get the person's name & address.
Click to expand...

Aside from being authoritarian crap, it isn't even possible. New York has no jurisdiction for most web sites, foreign users don't have drivers licenses and you couldn't tell if the license received is fake.

Like most people trying to oppress the internet, the mouth breathing idiots int he new york don't even have the first clue how the web works. You can fix a problem when you are so stupid you don't even understand the environment you are working in.
 
rathi said:
...Like most people trying to oppress the internet, the mouth breathing idiots int he new york don't even have the first clue how the web works. You can fix a problem when you are so stupid you don't even understand the environment you are working in.
Click to expand...



that doesn't make any sense.
 
This is one of the dumbest ideas for a law I have ever heard.
 
rathi said:
the mouth breathing idiots int he new york don't even have the first clue how the web works. You can fix a problem when you are so stupid you don't even understand the environment you are working in.
Click to expand...

Thunder said:
that doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

rathi was referring to the republicans in NYS, so it does make sense
 
radcen said:
Good idea? Bad idea?
Click to expand...

idiotic-a conservative talk show host this morning was crucifying this idiocy that apparently has GOP backing

its idiotic. If someone slanders you you can get a court order unveiling their ID
 
The nanny state marches forward with yet another useless, unenforcable law. Just what they have in mind, as an ultimate goal, is unclear. If the poor, feeling bullied, NY resident is being 'pestered' by some big, bad cyberwolf what is the state to do? Will the cyber liar ever be brought to face justice? Will the 'webmaster' be held liable if the cyberbully turns out to be a cyberliar, untraceable as the home street address is bogus, the proper name a fraud and the IP address traced to a public library or school computer? I see NY has solved all other crime problems and has decided to tackle this one to make it perfectly safe to blog and network in total safety, no feelings will ever be hurt again in the Empire State, no public outings, no name calling, no rumor spreading and all will be polite, just as on the streets of NYC! Crime will be outlawed in NY and everybody will live happily ever after, the end of cyberterror, at last.
 
Last edited:
Have to wonder, how would they go about enforcing a rule like this, esp when a web site and its administrators might be physically located on the other side of the planet.

Maybe it would be easier to eliminate all NY residents from the comments section of all web sites, the rest of the world shouldn't have to follow NY state law.

S6779-2011 - NY Senate Open Legislation - Provides that a web site administrator shall remove any comments posted upon request unless the poster agrees to attach his or her name to the post - New York State Senate

Proposed 'Internet Protection Act' criticized
 
It's really unlikely that this is going to pass Constitutional muster. People should not be required to a) share their identity with anyone online that they don't have to just to post comments on a website and b) obey a state law from a state that truly has no jurisdiction over such a thing or the majority of those who this may affect.
 
Thunder said:
rathi said:
…Like most people trying to oppress the internet, the mouth breathing idiots int he new york don't even have the first clue how the web works. You can fix a problem when you are so stupid you don't even understand the environment you are working in.
Click to expand...

that doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

Aside from some typing errors, it makes perfect sense to anyone who doesn't match the description given therein.
 
Cyberbullying? That is so 3 weeks ago. I'm onto cyber flashing now. I've already hit 23 other sites with the pics, now wait here guys while I upload a picture of my taint and nuts for you all to view and cherish as well.
 
Thunder said:
I remain anonymous on this forum for two reasons:

1. I have already been stalked on another forum, where someone posted my name, a picture of me, and the agency I work for.

2. Calls for violence against me have been made on this forum.

Thats [sic] why I stay anonymous.

However, if this law passes in the New York State Legislaure [sic] (not New York City as someone suggested), I will become unanonymous.
Click to expand...

If you agree with this proposed law, why do you not, in good faith, act in accordance with it even without any such law in effect?

How can anyone take you seriously in supporting a law compelling from others against their will what you will not willingly do?


And for the record, “Bob Blaylock” is my actual name. Well, to be pedantic, my true, full, legal name is “Robert Wells Blaylock”, but everyone who knows me knows me as “Bob Blaylock”.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
If you agree with this proposed law, why do you not, in good faith, act in accordance with it even without any such law in effect?....
Click to expand...

I remain anonymous on this forum for two reasons:

1. I have already been stalked on another forum, where someone posted my name, a picture of me, and the agency I work for.

2. Calls for violence against me have been made on this forum.

Thats why I stay anonymous.
 
Utility Man said:
Have to wonder, how would they go about enforcing a rule like this, esp when a web site and its administrators might be physically located on the other side of the planet.

Maybe it would be easier to eliminate all NY residents from the comments section of all web sites, the rest of the world shouldn't have to follow NY state law.
Click to expand...
I wonder that as well. In a similar vein, I have always wondered how countries like France could put pressure on companies like eBay for selling Nazi memorabilia and essentially force them not to within France only. I presumed at the time that eBay did not have a literal physical in France, though maybe they do.

I suspect the answer for France/eBay would be similar in this case.
 
I'm certainly not in favor of this bill simply because the fact that you are anonymous on the internet is one of the major pulls and forces of it. On the Internet you can be anyone you want to be, for good or bad reasons.

With all these new internet regulation bills that are coming forward im rather worried about what the state of the internet will become if many of these succed in passing.
 
JohnWOlin said:
Cyberbullying? That is so 3 weeks ago. I'm onto cyber flashing now. I've already hit 23 other sites with the pics, now wait here guys while I upload a picture of my taint and nuts for you all to view and cherish as well.
Click to expand...

SHOCKER.jpg
 
Thunder said:
I remain anonymous on this forum for two reasons:

1. I have already been stalked on another forum, where someone posted my name, a picture of me, and the agency I work for.
Click to expand...

So what?

I have no problem with anyone knowing such things about me. I'll prove it right now.

EDITED FOR CONTENT

Thunder said:
2. Calls for violence against me have been made on this forum.
Click to expand...

Really? Where? The only recollection I have of any such threats being made on this forum, in which you were involved, you were the one making the threats. I guess that's easier to do when you think you're doing so anonymously.

I think the proposed law is a very bad idea, and I think if it passes, it will be struck down in the courts as blatantly unconstitutional. But I'm not afraid or ashamed to let my opinions and views be associated with my true identity, and don't feel a need to express them anonymously.

If you think that the proposed law is a good idea, then it is hypocritical of you not to voluntarily comply with what it would require, if enacted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bob Blaylock said:
So what?...

....Really? Where? The only recollection I have of any such threats being made on this forum, in which you were involved, you were the one making the threats. I guess that's easier to do when you think you're doing so anonymously.....
Click to expand...

so what? I don't want some psychopath hunting me down and shooting me dead. That's why I don't reveal my name, address, photo, or phone number.

I already once had some obsessive asshole with a hard-on for me, stalk me on the internet, looking through to see which forums I participate in, and then post very personal stuff about me...along with two photos of me.

And now that I have had suggestions of deadly violence be done against me, I have NO intention of letting folks know who I am or where I am, unless the law requires it.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
so what? I don't want some psychopath hunting me down and shooting me dead. That's why I don't reveal my name, address, photo, or phone number.

I already once had some obsessive asshole with a hard-on for me, stalk me on the internet, looking through to see which forums I participate in, and then post very personal stuff about me...along with two photos of me.

And now that I have had suggestions of deadly violence be done against me, I have NO intention of letting folks know who I am or where I am, unless the law requires it.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that you've made some good arguments against the proposed law that you support. But I think my point stands. You support a proposed law that would compel others to do that which you will not voluntarily do. This is hypocritical. If you think that you have good reasons for remaining anonymous, and if you think you should be allowed to do so, then where do you get off suggesting that others not be allowed this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom