Plook wrote:
one of the uglies wrote:
I haven't been here long enough to answer anything in regards to others, however as this thread is here it seems the appropriate place to discuss such issues.
I realize that some of my posts are edgy, and I myself am generally a bit nervous about some of the posts I make, and always second guess myself about whether or not I'm doing more harm than good. I try not to do anything that would get the forum owners or moderators, myself or anyone else into any trouble, however I can't be sure of every possible legal jurisdiction that the forum might be viewed in. Not that they need it, but I would tell them to please remove anything I post that they feel could jeopardize the forum, business, future performances, etc. I would not bare any grudge against them for that. They must first and foremost do their best to protect this rare, and I would say precious free speech zone. This is one aspect of Frank's legacy.
In regards to checking IP addresses, technically this is a much more difficult thing than many people might realize. There are several ways in which one might be able to spoof their IP address. Two that have at times been rather popular are TOR and PUTTY. These programs will allow a person to route their outgoing and incoming data streams through an encrypted tunnel. It is an invaluable aid for people who are trying to access information that is being restricted to them by their government. Some examples of legitimate uses would be any person living in china trying to learn about the protest in Tiananmen Square, google would be of no help as google essentially has sold out human rights to any and every government. The recent news coverage of the Iranian elections and the subsequent protests may also have been aided by programs of this nature, as they would prevent the Iranian government from immediately knowing that banned sites such as youtube were being accessed by their citizens. Obviously this has been and still is occasionally used for other purposes. This has led to several hackers developing methods of breaking the effectiveness of the programs, and as such they are not one hundred percent reliable. But they are probably the best available method to work around censorship. The forum moderators could conceivably systematically ban the entire range of addresses that would be used by TOR, but doing so would also block people from lets say the middle east or somewhere that might actually have a ban on Frank's music or any number of topics that the majority of us take for granted as freely discussable. Keep in mind that any form of political dissent is still a punishable crime in many places in the world, so someone from say Iran could conceivably be prosecuted for accessing this forum if they read the posts that refer to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a derogatory way.
I hope that gives you some idea of why banned people can generally speaking still get access to sites they have been banned from. And why despite the other uses of such programs they are a very necessary and valuable tool that should be continually improved, and made available to everyone, we take the bad with the good or we lose everything.
So when you listen to a record and it hits a scratch and just keeps skipping over and over you leave it on since one must take the bad with the good...how Nobel of you.
No, but I also don't entirely give up on everything else by the performer, nor do I simply throw it away without first attempting to clean the grooves.
I'm not sure I take your meaning though, are you saying that you would rather give up on freedom of speech for the sake of getting rid of the bad things? If that is the case then at what point and whom do you trust to draw the line? How much of your own rights and self determination are you willing to give control of to a government body of censors? Knowing that those who you trust to be in charge of making that decision may not always be in charge, what will you do when someone else becomes in charge and decides that what you hold as worthy of protection becomes intolerable officially?
Will you give up the rights of people who do not have the option of believing in any god other than the one that the state endorses for the sake of getting rid of something you find objectionable, as would be the case in Tiananmen Square. Would you give up the right of all oppressed people to have a venue of some form to attempt to tell their stories, or to express their joy, or attempt to experience something they are forcefully denied? I don't think I can agree with that, so I rightly or wrongly choose to defend things that even I find distasteful, offensive, obscene, etc. because it is my belief that it is the only way to effectively prevent the gradual erosion of the freedom to think, and decide for yourself what you find beauty in, whether that be some religion, some story, some poem, some artwork, song, or whatever else you can think of.
I had to step away from the computer before this actually occurred to me, but you might also just be referring to DD and his repetitious "did someone say ass" I must admit that seemed a touch silly to me. Not ban worthy, but certainly somewhat tiresome.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
ps gail is mikey and mikey is gail......... more to follow 