Slashdot Mirror
Internet Defamation Suit Tests Online Anonymity
The Xoxo Reader writes "Reuters reports that two women at Yale Law School have filed suit for defamation and infliction of emotional distress against an administrator and 28 anonymous posters on AutoAdmit (a.k.a. Xoxohth), a popular law student discussion site. Experts are watching to see if the suit will unmask the posters, who are identified in the complaint only by their pseudonyms. Since AutoAdmit's administrators have previously said that they do not retain IP logs of posters, identifying the defendants may test the limits of the legal system and anonymity on the Internet. So far, one method tried was to post the summons on the message board itself and ask the defendants to step forward. The controversy leading to this lawsuit was previously discussed on Slashdot."
Shhh....don't feed the trolls, it only makes them hungrier.
Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
he was also a liberal in the most meaningful and classic sense.
How do you think Lincoln would have fared in the GOP of today? FIrst of all, he couldn't have raised 100mil, so he'd never have gotten the least bit of Republican attention. They'd also have had a problem with that whole "honest" business. Not a core GOP value.
I'm pretty sure that FDR would still be welcome in today's Democratic Party. Lincoln wouldn't last 5 minutes in today's GOP.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Crime dropped in the U.S. while you were mayor, goofball.
Why does Rudy Guiliani promote a culture of dependency and failure? Anger? Fear? Stupidity? Some deep brain-damaged urging of his soul? The answer cannot easily be found, but the claim that granting him complete control over our lives is as important as breathing air is illusory. And that's why I feel compelled to say something about bloodthirsty, lewd meatheads.
Not to belabor the point, but Guiliani knows that performing an occasional act of charity will make some people forgive -- or at least overlook -- all of his ungrateful excesses. My take on the matter is that I wonder what would happen if he really did regulate ageism. There's a spooky thought. This may sound like caricature, but someone has been giving his brain a very thorough washing, and now Guiliani is trying to do the same to us. I don't know which are worse, right-wing tyrants or left-wing tyrants. But I do know that if I want to tear off all my clothes and run naked down the street, that should be my prerogative. I really don't need Guiliani forcing me to. Now, why all this fuss about a few malignant prognoses? Simply put, it's because his primary viewpoint, that he can achieve his goals by friendly and moral conduct, is directly related to the attitudes in our society that pervert human instincts by suppressing natural, feral constraints and encouraging abnormal patterns of behavior. Still, I recommend you check out some of his op-ed pieces and draw your own conclusions on the matter.
Guiliani's prank phone calls are built on a backlash fueled by anger -- in the form of resentment, spite, vengeance, envy, loss, and bitterness over declining status -- on the part of obstinate, sinful knuckle-draggers. And here, I contend, lies a clue to the intellectual vacuum so gapingly apparent in Guiliani's methods of interpretation. Even giving Guiliani the benefit of the doubt, I and Guiliani part company when it comes to the issue of classism. He feels that women are spare parts in the social repertoire -- mere optional extras -- while I claim that when a friend wants to drive inebriated, you try to stop him. Well, Guiliani is drunk with power, which is why we must anneal discourse with honesty, clear thinking, and a sense of moral good.
We can never return to the past. And if we are ever to move forward to the future, we decidedly have to encourage open, civic engagement. Consider the following, which I'll address in greater detail later: We can all have daydreams about Happy Fuzzy Purple Bunny Land, where everyone is caring, loving, and nice. Not only will those daydreams not come true, but Guiliani has frequently been spotted making nicey-nice with the most judgmental know-nothings you'll ever see. Is this because he needs their help to sell otherwise perfectly reasonable people the idée fixe that his fairy tales epitomize wholesome family entertainment? To ask that question another way, to what depths of depravity does he need to descend before the rest of us realize we must improve the living conditions of the most vulnerable in our society -- the sick, the old, the disabled, the unemployed, and our youth -- all of whose lives are made miserable by Rudy Guiliani? Apparently, even know-it-all Guiliani doesn't know the answer to that one. It wouldn't even matter much if he did, given that he sees no reason why he shouldn't create a world without history, without philosophy, without science, without reason -- a world without beauty of any kind, without art, without literature, without culture. It is only through an enlightened, outraged citizenry that such moral turpitude, corruption, and degradation of the law can be brought to a halt. So, let me enlighten and outrage you by stating that Guiliani apparently can't tell the difference between flirting and sexual harassment, between white lies and perjury, or between a schoolboy carrying a butter knife and carrying a switchblade. Now, that last statement is a bit of an oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nev
Hitler was a socialist.
Mao was a communist.
Stalin was a communist.
Guevara was a communist.
All wanted to overthrow the existing order and build a utopia.
All are among history's greatest monsters.
All are liberals, as they are ones wishing for great change and destruction of private property rights.
Sorry AC - you lose at the Internets.
I am dedazo.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.