Slashdot Mirror

poor little clams, snap snap snap

fun assumption. i guess i'm an exception. :)

jon

I can't believe someone brought up Scientology on Slashdot and there are only two replies in the thread.

I'd be glad to help. After all, if someone comes to Google looking for a cult, I'd like for them to know where to find a cult.

I'd be glad to help. After all, if someone comes to Google looking for a cult, I'd like for them to know where to find a cult.

Since we know Google spiders /., it would be helpful if you'd make Scientologists a link to xenu.net instead of some random phrase. After all, we all know where to go to get information on Scientology, but your casual Google queryist might not. Right?

Since we know Google spiders /., it would be helpful if you'd make Scientologists a link to xenu.net instead of some random phrase. After all, we all know where to go to get information on Scientology, but your casual Google queryist might not. Right?

In that case, the court said this: "The court does not find workable a theory of direct infringement that would hold the entire Internet liable for actions that cannot reasonably be deterred." The worst possible outcome from a Scientologist's perspective.

Judge Cooper upheld this precedent with her current summary judgement. Way cool.

Yet again, the Scientologists shoot themselves in the foot!

But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all- knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!

Scientology is for delusional former child actors and coked-out ex realtors.

Great, it wasn't bad enough Hollywood and the Austrians were ripping off Philip K. Dick, now the Scientologists are getting into the act?

Bah. At least it's not Travolta!


Troll? Or just an amazing fascimile?

Well, it might raise Xenu's overall rank, as being a site with lots of links to it. But yes, for the most effect, link to it for Scientology.

Your link is fundamentally boring, because nobody goes out looking for information about xenu.net. What people probably want to learn about is Scientology.

searching for "scientology" on google produces the official website first and Operation Clambake second.

if you read the latter - basically a big expose on how extremely ridiculous CS really is - you will understand why CS wants to keep that under wraps.

so what google did was to say, ok we remove all these little links and avoid a fight in court, but, at the same time, we will point everybody looking for information on CS to your arch-enemy.

i think google could "afford" a fight in court. but why would they when they have something much better: the power of information. CS is an easy targe there, because if everybody knew the truth about them, only a handful of freaks would participate.

If you could, please show me how that can be presented in an orderly, intelligent manner. I would suggest a comic book for guidance, but I don't think you'll be able to make it work.

This is a nice attempt.

Or this? Scientology

Ahh, like this? Scientology

In case you don't get the joke (like I didn't at first) read: http://www.xenu.net/archive/footbullet/

<Quote>
"Is CoS a cult or a religion?"

There are many types of cults. Some are religious cults and others are not, the first term does not rule out the other. Every cult can be defined as a group having all of the following five characteristics:

• uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members
• forms an elitist totalitarian society
• Its founder/leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma
• It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds and recruit people
• Its wealth does not benefit its members or society

I think their viewer is awful, but the rest of it is pretty cool. Try making some actual content with it, and you will likely agree with me.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, read the license yourself sometime (you have to download and install the software to read it). They don't put the license for their media creation software on their web site, so I haven't read it, but I assume it doesn't have the same draconian clauses as the player's license, otherwise folks like you and NPR wouldn't dare use it on production computers. You did read the license, didn't you?

I think their viewer is awful, but the rest of it is pretty cool. Try making some actual content with it, and you will likely agree with me.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, read the license yourself sometime (you have to download and install the software to read it). They don't put the license for their media creation software on their web site, so I haven't read it, but I assume it doesn't have the same draconian clauses as the player's license, otherwise folks like you and NPR wouldn't dare use it on production computers. You did read the license, didn't you?

These days, having moral courage usually means having the cash to back it up. Granted, Google has more cash than most high-tech companies these days, but not enough to shrug off Scientology. Also, Google could face a second, potentially more expensive investor lawsuit, should the Church of Scientology sue. Not taking proper steps to protect your investors' dollars is grounds for legal action; and the ultimate result, if and when you lose both lawsuits, could be the end of your company, with all those jobs lost and all your intellectual property on fire sale. This is the same reason why Slashdot resorted to similar indirect means a year ago.

The simple fact is that corporations exist to increase shareholder value -- not to make moral stands, employ people, heal people, or do all those other fuzzy things that they sometimes do in the process of making money. I don't like it either, but that's the state of the world.

These days, having moral courage usually means having the cash to back it up. Granted, Google has more cash than most high-tech companies these days, but not enough to shrug off Scientology. Also, Google could face a second, potentially more expensive investor lawsuit, should the Church of Scientology sue. Not taking proper steps to protect your investors' dollars is grounds for legal action; and the ultimate result, if and when you lose both lawsuits, could be the end of your company, with all those jobs lost and all your intellectual property on fire sale. This is the same reason why Slashdot resorted to similar indirect means a year ago.

The simple fact is that corporations exist to increase shareholder value -- not to make moral stands, employ people, heal people, or do all those other fuzzy things that they sometimes do in the process of making money. I don't like it either, but that's the state of the world.

One point the article made is that the original controversy caused lots more people to link to xenu.net, pushing it up from 4th in the Google results for "Scientology" to 2nd. I'd like to encourage everyone who hasn't already done so to also do this - maybe it can be pushed up to 1st :-)

"Don't ever defend. Always attack"

This has been nicknamed by the Churches critics as Operation Footbullet for obvious reasons.

Yes, so be safe and don't link to any anti-Scientology sites.

Remember when linking to Xenu.net to use Scientology and not $cientology. How many people use the $ in Google?

Remember when linking to Xenu.net to use Scientology and not $cientology. How many people use the $ in Google?

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Here, let me help you out on getting the Google rank up.

Hey.. when it comes to $cientology the more light you can shed on the bastards, the better!

(Links added to boost Xenu.net's Google rating..)

Hey.. when it comes to $cientology the more light you can shed on the bastards, the better!

(Links added to boost Xenu.net's Google rating..)

Hey.. when it comes to $cientology the more light you can shed on the bastards, the better!

(Links added to boost Xenu.net's Google rating..)

Hey.. when it comes to $cientology the more light you can shed on the bastards, the better!

(Links added to boost Xenu.net's Google rating..)

The poster even suggested hate speech would also be relegated to this category (although the furthest it went in the article was harmful to children). How would you define hate sites? Hitler site, well that seems like a good bet. But what about godhatesfags.com? Clearly not nice to homosexuals although some parishioners might disagree. What about even Operation Clambake? They definatly don't like scientology. Heck what about a well known Anti-MS, Anit-RIAA site? Where do you draw the line for inappropriate sites? Blocking software is one thing, there you are agreeing to their definition of inappropriate content, only affecting yourself and not directly affecting the site, however a legislative solution is affecting the site itself for everyone.

Does this new bill mean (if it were in the US) it would have to be xenu.prn?

As the Usenet thread points out, does this mean the Democratic Underground would have to move to democraticunderground.prn?

What's ICANN got to say about all this, since (I thought) they turned down .sex, .xxx, and .porn?

(Nevermind, scratch that last part.. I couldn't care less about what ICANN has to say about this.)

This seems to me to be one-upping the legislation that tries to redefine SMTP . Yikes.

"At this time, we are not running ads for sites that promote hate against another group or business."

&nbsp
&nbsp

[yes, i know that last link is "broken" -- i intended to not link to the clams]

It only works if the word scientology is hyperlinked to xenu.net. Like this: scientology. The important thing is that you just keep on trying. Maybe have a few other people show you how as well. That way it will be really, really clear.

I see...so then by linking Xenu.net under the name Scientology, I can increase raise the ranking of Xenu.net in Google's Scientology search pages. Wow! What a great way to stick it to the Church of Scientology and the Scientologists! I wonder what such famous Scientologists as John Travolta and Tom Cruise would think of that?

I see...so then by linking Xenu.net under the name Scientology, I can increase raise the ranking of Xenu.net in Google's Scientology search pages. Wow! What a great way to stick it to the Church of Scientology and the Scientologists! I wonder what such famous Scientologists as John Travolta and Tom Cruise would think of that?

I see...so then by linking Xenu.net under the name Scientology, I can increase raise the ranking of Xenu.net in Google's Scientology search pages. Wow! What a great way to stick it to the Church of Scientology and the Scientologists! I wonder what such famous Scientologists as John Travolta and Tom Cruise would think of that?