Thats it. We now live in a totalitarian regime. I know there's been riots but wtf

[case]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/16/uk-riots-four-years-disorder-facebook

[Prophet]

From what reports are saying here in the U.S. yo, your Parliament is considering getting rid of social media all together and instituting a social media ban

Europe is pretty fucked in general, but in this case I say yall roll with it, since social media like Facebook is pretty much a bane on society today IMO

[mandude]

I hate Facebook, but I also hate authority.

Don't worry. Just wait for it to get so bad, that people are forced to take it into their own hands. I've seriously been waiting for an uprising for years now. It's taking its damn time.

[kirsch]

so what did they actually post? This is prolly not a bad thing if you ask me. People can more or less do whatever the heck they want on the intronet and that is certainly A Bad Thing.

And as stupid as I think the social intronet scene is , I think messing with social media is retarded from their perspective. "oh people are rioting? maybe we should start taking away the things they love" yeah good one

[mandude]

How is having the freedom to do what one wants on the internet a bad thing?

[Ripplemagne]

Seen it on Glenn Beck about two years ago.

tl;dr: Simpsons did it.

[thomasbry]

Fuck bitches.

[kirsch]

How is having the freedom to do what one wants on the internet a bad thing?

it is great for the individual who has that ability , bad for society. Bad for the people who get stalkt/threatent/harasst and bad for the people ruining their lives with illicit imagery and text.

[thomasbry]

it is great for the individual who has that ability , bad for society. Bad for the people who get stalkt/threatent/harasst and bad for the people ruining their lives with illicit imagery and text.

So because there are bad people we shouldn't have that freedom?

[mandude]

It should be fairly easy to avoid those things on the internet what with the inherent anonymity. However, stupid people will always seem to triumph.

The likes of Facebook is enabling no one. If someone wants to do something destructive or illegal, they will find an outlet.

[kirsch]

So because there are bad people we shouldn't have that freedom?

You want the freedom to stalk and harass and threaten people? You want the freedom to exchange illegal materials? How stupid are you? "Only those bad, nasty, evil doers break rules so why even have them?!!!" What kind of logick is that? Try applying it to real life and see how far it gets you.


It should be fairly easy to avoid those things on the internet what with the inherent anonymity.

No one should have to go through the trouble and inconvenience of ensuring they are being anonymous enough to avoid being stalkt or harasst. The fact that a person is stupid does not give others the right to take advtange of them. That classick 'blame the victim' logick is retarded and if you buy into it then the only stupidity relevant to this discussion is your own.


If someone wants to do something destructive or illegal, they will find an outlet.

Not entirely sure what your point here is. Harassing someone over the internet is illegal. Facebook is part of the internet. Facebook can be used for illegal activities. People who commit illegal acts should suffer penalties under the law. Dunno where you guys get lost in this logick.

[thomasbry]

You want the freedom to stalk and harass and threaten people? You want the freedom to exchange illegal materials? How stupid are you? "Only those bad, nasty, evil doers break rules so why even have them?!!!" What kind of logick is that? Try applying it to real life and see how far it gets you. The concept of illegality is completely based on the laws, so if we were to allow everyone to exchange illegal materials then they would no longer be illegal. Also define stalk, harass, and threaten, they can be taken many different ways.





Not entirely sure what your point here is. Harassing someone over the internet is illegal. Facebook is part of the internet. Facebook can be used for illegal activities. People who commit illegal acts should suffer penalties under the law. Dunno where you guys get lost in this logick.
Your logic is flawed. People have just as much power to break the law offline as they do online. So why just focus on the internet?

[kirsch]

The concept of illegality is completely based on the laws, so if we were to allow everyone to exchange illegal materials then they would no longer be illegal. Also define stalk, harass, and threaten, they can be taken many different ways.

What is your point? s'funny how you guys can critisize me so easily but when it comes to putting verbs into your sentences you guys dun have the balls and just beat around the bush because you have nothing.

Let us stop playing games. Please answer one simple "yes or no" question before I bother wasting any more time on you. Do you believe it should be legal to exchange child pornography over the internet?


Your logic is flawed. People have just as much power to break the law offline as they do online. So why just focus on the internet?

Your reading comprehension is flawed. All I said is that I believe we need to increase the degree to which we are enforcing rules on the internet, which has nothing todo with focusing on things that are online as opposed to offline. This is just you putting words in my mouth because, as I said, you have nothing. You are nothing. Stop wasting my time.

[kirsch]

So because there are bad people we shouldn't have that freedom?

Apparently I did not address this clearly enough for the retards in the good ol' US of A to comprehend.

I will ask you again: Do you think you should have the freedom to stalk and harass and threaten people over the internet? Or is it impossible to stalk and harass and threaten people over the internet with the definitions of those words you use? You cannot escape both of these questions, and you cannot answer them by asking me questions yourself. Based on what you have said you either think it is okay to harass people over the internet, or you think it is impossible to harass people over the internet. Both of these notions are foolish.

If rules are put in place to stop "bad people" from doing "bad things" then you wanting the freedom to break those rules is retarded. 'Freedom' is not just some word you can trot out any time you are not feeling privileged enough. I bet you guys are the same people who think that 'free speech' means you are free to say whatever the heck you want to say.

I am curious , please tell me...
What is your racial makeup?
What country were you raised in?
Are you a male or a female?
... but I am guessing I already know the answers

[mandude]

No one should have to go through the trouble and inconvenience of ensuring they are being anonymous enough to avoid being stalkt or harasst. The fact that a person is stupid does not give others the right to take advtange of them. That classick 'blame the victim' logick is retarded and if you buy into it then the only stupidity relevant to this discussion is your own.I am not blaming anyone. It is much easier and more efficient to avoid the stalker than to reprimand the stalker, so why not put the focus where it will have a greater effect?


Not entirely sure what your point here is. Harassing someone over the internet is illegal. Facebook is part of the internet. Facebook can be used for illegal activities. People who commit illegal acts should suffer penalties under the law. Dunno where you guys get lost in this logick.Allow me to reiterate: Facebook enables harassment in the same way having fists enables assault.

[thomasbry]

Apparently I did not address this clearly enough for the retards in the good ol' US of A to comprehend.

I will ask you again: Do you think you should have the freedom to stalk and harass and threaten people over the internet? Or is it impossible to stalk and harass and threaten people over the internet with the definitions of those words you use? You cannot escape both of these questions, and you cannot answer them by asking me questions yourself. Based on what you have said you either think it is okay to harass people over the internet, or you think it is impossible to harass people over the internet. Both of these notions are foolish. Can you show me where I have made it look like I believe one or the other to be true?


If rules are put in place to stop "bad people" from doing "bad things" then you wanting the freedom to break those rules is retarded. 'Freedom' is not just some word you can trot out any time you are not feeling privileged enough. I bet you guys are the same people who think that 'free speech' means you are free to say whatever the heck you want to say. Didn't say I wanted those freedoms. Making assumptions gets you nowhere.


What is your point? s'funny how you guys can critisize me so easily but when it comes to putting verbs into your sentences you guys dun have the balls and just beat around the bush because you have nothing. Says the girl generalizing Americans.


Let us stop playing games. Please answer one simple "yes or no" question before I bother wasting any more time on you. Do you believe it should be legal to exchange child pornography over the internet? I don't care what people fap off to as long as they aren't doing it offline.




Your reading comprehension is flawed. All I said is that I believe we need to increase the degree to which we are enforcing rules on the internet, which has nothing todo with focusing on things that are online as opposed to offline. This is just you putting words in my mouth because, as I said, you have nothing. You are nothing. Stop wasting my time.

Your posts are full of contradictions, you say people shouldn't be harassed over the internet by making assumptions and flinging insults at anyone that doesn't suck your dick and completely agree with every point you make.

You sound really bitter. You just need some dick probably and you'll be happy.

[Giggle Monster]

I bet you guys are the same people who think that 'free speech' means you are free to say whatever the heck you want to say.

So what DOES it mean? Free speech unless someone takes offense?

[Ripplemagne]

cycXuYzmzNg

[CBcinema]

So what DOES it mean? Free speech unless someone takes offense?

Free speech is fine until someone hears something they don't want to hear. Lol, kinda defeats the purpose.

[Ripplemagne]

http://vbulletin.thesite.org/showthread.php/145572-Censorship-or-recognising-offensive-langauge

Fun conversation about freedom of speech.

[andrea17]

freedom of speech - what you have before you get locked up for saying certain things

[phaggot]

Seen it on Glenn Beck about two years ago.

tl;dr: Simpsons did it.i think you've missed the point of that episode

[andrea17]

oh really?

[idk]

Just wait four days and the totalitarian regime will be gone.

[Phlyarologist]

So much trolling in this thread. Smh

[andrea17]

you might as well troll then too.