Slashdot Mirror
Dirty Tricks? Look-Alike Websites Lure Congressional Donors
First time accepted submitter AdamnSelene writes "Forbes reports on a National Republican Congressional Committee sanctioned campaign worthy of the NSA: fake candidate websites that use identical or similar pictures and color schemes to solicit donations to defeat the Democratic candidate. The Tampa Bay Times reports that the NRCC initially refused to refund the contribution from a Tampa Bay doctor who caught onto the scam, and he had to contact his credit card company to challenge the charges. The National Journal reports that the NRCC-sponsored effort may run afoul of Federal Election Commission regulations, though it expects that the bipartisan FEC will be toothless when it comes to enforcement. However, I have to wonder whether this is finally a good enough reason to use the DMCA and file take-down notices against the faux websites. Perhaps the candidates could solve this themselves, and get a judgement for copyright infringement so absurdly large that it puts the NRCC out of business?" Some sites along these lines might be dirtier than the ones here illustrated, which seem to fit pretty well into the broad world of snarky and cutting political ads; Dr. Ray Bellamy, the Tampa Bay donor mentioned above, intended to give money to candidate Alex Sink, but evidently didn't notice this line in bold print, just above the "Donate" button: "Make a contribution today to help defeat Alex Sink and candidates like her." Note that, as the Tampa Bay Times' article mentions, this kind of site isn't limited to Republicans, either.
Don't you freedom-loving libertarians love this kind of shit?
Who cares about socialization, right? It's all about "me! Me! Me!" and whatever I can get away with.
Remember, you are a precious snowflake, and should be allowed to do what you want, because you are a precious snowflake.
yah.. sooo..
and this is why you don't vote Republican-lite libertarianism kids.
Grown-ups with socialization skills know this already.
Nerdy unsocialized people like the ones that infest this site do not know this.
At least the Slashdot beta site fooled no-one.
Has anyone created a website like the classic version of Slashdot that people are migrating to? I keep getting forced into the beta version when I come here. Where will everyone be going once this beta goes live?
What do GNOME 3, Windows 8, Firefox and Slashdot all have in common?
They're all software systems that have been ruined thanks to half-assed, hipster-inspired UI "redesigns" that alienated nearly all of the existing users, without actually bringing in any new users, while at the same time making said software virtually unusable.
The outcome of these disasters hasn't been a total loss, however. It has actually resulted in a new rule-of-thumb for UI design. A UI designer merely needs to ask himself or herself one simple question when analyzing a design: "Would a hipster approve of this design?"
If the answer is "Yes", then the design is inherently flawed and should be thrown out immediately, much like should happen to the Slashdot beta site. If the answer is "No", then the UI designer is on the right track. If there's one thing that's guaranteed in the UI design world, it's that the more hipsters hate your UI, the more effective and efficient it is to use for the majority of people.
God is perfectly just. God will talk and reveal fraud. God says... passed trees fairer concerning smells existence treasure-house begotten confusedly beholder beauty upward Literary family hath Enter prevailed strangers emerging range affirmed because wanderer wished decree severely proceeding Furthermore joineth falsehood perils gathering were agree occurs sufficeth mother's region SUCH indulgent chambers aquatic manner in-breathing Perchance unalterable utter admiration distribute crookedly hastened safe locking third ten promise blottedst healthful unchangeable counsel MONEY succeeding observance round begat formed adversity evincing panegyric fluctuating chanting streaming createth creeping difficulty readest endeavouring chosen amendment scantling sparedst separateth accuser Heaven
Make a contribution then ask for it back. When they refuse, make a credit card chargeback. Will cost the NRCC $30 for each chargeback, and if they get too many, they get bumped up to a worse level merchant account.
Die, damn it!
Political 'speech' has far protection via concepts as copyright to prevent abuse. It needs to remain this way. Once you start down this path, in no time at all you wont be able to quote an opponent in political discourse without risk of being sued.
You can also kiss parody goodbye.
Now, back to the topic at hand, if you put up a website, regardless of content, with intent to defraud, that is a crime all by itself. We don't need more rules or laws to deal with that.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I keep getting forced into beta. Do you know how I can switch back to classic?
just die
A trick played on the loyal users who built Slashdot into what it is today.
We will turn our backs, Dice. Don't forget who makes Slashdot successful.
No wait...
The "jollyforcongress.com" site: (a) doesn't ask for money, (b) immediately redirects to a page that has "floridadems" in the URL, and (c) looks nothing like Jolly's actual campaign site. So please stop pretending there's some kind of equivalence here. There isn't.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Next time they'll just disguise as opposite party members and get elected.
Not only that, it's got DISHONEST, LOBBYIST, etc written all over the guy's pics.
Oh wait, that's what's confusing the Republicans.
It seems we have two parties in America right now: the Socialist party and the Hypocrite party.
Another poster points out that there's a sucker born every minute. The ultimate object in politics is to WIN. Stop acting surprised if one party or another engages in devious activity to reach that goal. It's been happening for thousands of years. It's never going to stop. Wash away your political views and you'll see they all do it, to one degree or another. Our perceptions of who's doing it 'more' are a major part of how we see the world, politically.
1. Massively under-fund education 2. Take advantage of the under-educated masses 3. Profit
To make your voice heard that Anonymous Cowards are really the backbone of the Slashdot forums, and and the best looking guys too!
If you are going to whip out the credit card to spend a little money, take a little time to read all the text on the page. It was in large type that it was a donation to defeat the candidate. How many times in the past have we seen cute, cleaver and obscene assaults on congressional candidates on the Internet? Just google Santorum.
If you like your fake congressional candidate website, you can keep your fake congressional candidate website. Its political speech.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Forbes reports on a National Republican Congressional Committee sanctioned campaign worthy of the NSA
I get that we don't like the NSA around here, but why are we bringing it up when discussing an article that has nothing to do with anything the NSA does? What's the thinking process? "Hrm, this scam is slimy. Oh hey! The NSA is slimy too!"
Am I missing something?
From the summary: 'Dr. Ray Bellamy, the Tampa Bay donor mentioned above, intended to give money to candidate Alex Sink, but evidently didn't notice this line in bold print, just above the "Donate" button: "Make a contribution today to help defeat Alex Sink and candidates like her."'
Is this how you want your doctor reading the physicians desk reference?
If you look at the web site or the photos in the article it's pretty hard to miss that one is contributing to "help defeat Alex Sink."
Yep, let's start protecting ourselves from more than just the fine print. Let's protect ourselves from the bolded headlines also. A little reading comprehension may have helped the good doctor realize just what he was doing.
We need more two party system news, not news for nerds and stuff that matters to the world
Isn't this just a way for them to get feedback from their audience? Contributions indicate a positive response, right?
I am surprised at the pervasive negativity against the beta, spamming all topics.
Slashdot, please roll out beta and close down classic as soon as possible! I hope the whiners will turn away and create their own site instead.
The new look has one great advantage: screen dumps will waste less green ink. The disadvantage is that printouts will require more paper, and onscreen consumption of the threads requires more scrolling.
Other than that I have not discovered any real differences.
Oh wait, except there is one specific issue left: Until today, every time I tried followed the "read more" link to see the comments, all I got was:
"Shazbot! We ran into some trouble getting the comments.Try again... na-nu, na-nu!"
Clicking the "Load More" button just reproduced the same Shazbot! message. The present topic is the first that I am able to follow in beta. The next topic down the front page returned another Shazbot. So, please fix the Shazbots ASAP, then close classic. Thanks.
There is no substitute for common sense. Especially, no body of rules will do.
First, the candidate is a public figure, so that closes a lot of avenues.
Second, the sites were only copied once, and were lookalikes; it's not clear they were actually copied. Not copied means it's not a copyright violation.
Third, it's unlikely that it's registered at the copyright office, which limits the liability.
It might be able to be used, but I have doubts it can recover the money fraudulently received. If the candidates had trademarked their names, it might be a possible avenue, but I don't think these people who made the sites would care much.
There is no way that someone who can read would mistake that their donation was to defeat the candidate in question. This is not a scam. This is the type if fundraising widely practiced by both parties. Since the submitter likes a paint with a broad brush - I would say she must be a democratic operative who is in favor of free speech only when they agree with it.
Fraud with clear intent: Time for the state DA offices to do their work. Federal agencies should be on this like flies on fresh horse shit.
Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
So I set up a third copycat website, but this time I wrote "Make a contribution today to help pay for me to stay on my tropical island, from where I will occasionally make telephone calls and emails opposing Alex Sink".
I accept $50,000 of donations, most of which I spend on my luxurious tropical lifestyle. This wasn't fraud?
Ok, the real question is, should be have laws to protect suckers? Or are they not worth protecting due to their inferior brain activity?
If Liberal want to win they got they do better because they are a free man
Oh, you poor, poor Christians. Whatever will you do when we win the war on Christmas, and conifers are entirely outlawed, and you can't decorate your pagan trees anymore?
"Make a contribution then ask for it back. When they refuse, make a credit card chargeback. Will cost the NRCC $30 for each chargeback, and if they get too many, they get bumped up to a worse level merchant account."
What I think is funny is that a headline at the top of the page which says in bold letters Make a Contribution Today to Help Defeat Alex Sink and Candidates Like Her is somehow "misleading".
Caling that "small print at the bottom of the screen" as Forbes did is just plain bullshit. It's big, bold, in your face print, right there at the top.
When engaged in BLACKENING the reputation of another, you frequently take on the mantle of a supporter of the entity you wish to damage.
In US politics, this means nothing can be taken at face value. Only a few days back, I was reading in one of the the fake 'Independent' George Soros backed 'news' sites the outrageous story of how a poor single mother had been raped, abused and then dismissed from her job by a highly placed Church official. It was a report designed to tug at the heart-strings of every bleeding heart liberal reader. However, five minutes of Google use told a very different tale.
Said victim was actually a person who had (allegedly) used her position in the Church to steal a fortune, and had just been arrested for the crime. Days after her arrest, her defence lawyer chose to use her consensual BDSM relationship with one of the people she worked with to imply to the very stupid that this was another of those organised religion abuse cases.
For Alphas, headline journalism doesn't work. But for the vast majority of readers (including 99% of you reading this), headline journalism is the most powerful propaganda tool imaginable. YOU won't research beneath the headline. YOU will either see the headline as reinforcing your current world view (in which case you'll like it), or you'll see it as propaganda for the other side, in which case you'll be proud to reject it. Prejudice, to an alpha, is cancer of the mind. To a beta, the whole point of 'education' is to acquire the 'correct' prejudice.
I hate organised religion, but the story I mentioned above stank, even though I have natural sympathy for the 'alternative' media. It stank so badly, it seemed in need of fact checking, after which I discovered just how far this media site would lie to sell an agenda. Sadly the lies sat next to the very important story of the 'cash for kids' scandal that led to every child in a near New York state that appeared before a juvenile court for minor school discipline issues being sent to prison by a judge who received direct financial payments from the private organisation that built and ran the children's prison.
This 'website donation' affair REEKS of a propaganda ploy to manipulate the opinions of you betas, and the promotion of the story by the owners of Slashdot pretty much confirms this suspicion. However, if you vote in national elections, you are beyond lost, so it hardly matters.
How about phishing victims?
Let's look at the original site in the screenshot because they have changed it since this story broke.
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/...
1) It uses the exact same color scheme as the real site
2) There is really just one word that reveals the true intention: "defeat" in large type that is under the main headline. Skim-reading could easily miss this word.
3) If you miss that word, most all the other text on the site is written to be confusing and ambiguous. It doesn't say "Stop Alex Sink" it says "Alex Sink, Congress". Why do you think they did that?
4)TFS is wrong, that word "defeat" is in a subtitle below the header and off to the right, nowhere near any button.
Sure this guy was dumb, or maybe going to fast and not paying attention to who he was donating to. But the NRCC clearly intended it to be confused with the real site. This is no different than posting an Ebay phishing site. Dont be quick to judge when your mom or grandpa or some other person could have made the same mistake.
Was this guy an idiot? Yes.
Is the NRCC committing fraud? Yes.
This is Alex Sink's actual website. This, as near as I can tell, is the "fake" website referenced. They do have similar color schemes, but apart from the domain name, all of the text and media on the website is calling for Alex Sink's defeat. It says: "DONATE: Help us stop Alex Sink from bankrupting us in Congress." If you click "DONATE" it takes you to a form which prominently says "Make a Contribution Today to Help Defeat Alex Sink and candidates like her." At the bottom of every page there is a footer which reads "Paid for by the National Republican Congressional Committee and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee."
If you're really intent on clicking through without reading anything, I suppose you might be confused. But at that point I'm not sure what can even be done to tip you off.
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
Democrats have used fake websites, and their functionality depended on the purpose. Of course they have done more than that too, including running fake candidates.
Dems who created fake Tea Party candidates arraigned in Michigan
Reid Campaign Targets Angle Supporters With Phishing Website
Harry Reid’s campaign, however, took the code from the prior Angle website and launched a website called “TheRealSharronAngle.com.” The fake website was what, in internet terminology, is called spoofing, where a seemingly real website is created, usually to obtain information under false pretenses (frequently referred to as “phishing”). ...
But the reality is that by creating a spoofed website with the contact and volunteer functions operable, the Reid campaign sought to obtain personally identifiable information about Angle supporters. At a minimum, such information about Angle supporters would have been gathered under false pretenses.
The phishing function also would have been disruptive to the Angle campaign because people who thought they had volunteered for the Angle campaign never would have been contacted to help out because they had, in fact, been tricked.
Regardless of whether the Reid campaign’s spoofing and phishing attempt was criminal, it was sleazy.
Is Reid Campaign Hiding Its Activities To Evade Campaign Finance Laws?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
How can you tell a real one from a fake one? Donating to one or the other will give the same results. You're gonna get screwed either way.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
...that even if a law has been broken here nobody will go to jail?
Your beta rant rant was very disappointing.
When it has been found that a PAC has used any type of fraud or trickery to get a donation said PAC will be subject to a Full Forensic Level IRS Audit (since they did this what else have they done with the "books").
Oh and for the duration of the Audit they are bared from doing any funding transfers/transactions.
Gitmo ain't got nothing on the Pain and Suffering the Infernal Revenue Service can cause even without using the horror of BETA SLASHDOT.
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
Funny how you didn't note that Reid's campaign turned off the donate function. And there is no evidence that Reid's fake site actually collected any PII. The author just assumed it did because the form submit button worked. As a slashdotter, you should know better than to accept that as proof. Terrible, untrustworthy links you got there too. Please learn to link to at least semi-neutral sources.
Let's see what actually following your evidence of equivalency provides:
1) First link, National Review. Terribly partisan but OK, will verify what it says. And truly looks like election fraud. Fair enough there were other sources on this incident -- many more recent ones too. The people responsible have been arrested, gone to trial and have been been sentenced. (Google is your friend). Regardless this is off-topic. You are comparing local election fraud to national. Local and national politics have little to do with each other and the national parties that local politicians identify with have no bearing to local issues. Doesn't matter if someone is pro choice or pro life when their job is to make sure the garbage is picked up and the roads are plowed when it snows. Or perhaps you were saying we should arrest the chairman of the NRCC? Sounds good.
2) What the crap is this blog? The story says he didnt collect money, and has no proof of collecintg PII. No other sources. The story you link also shows technical ignorance about HTML forms. The site has a clear political slant (right in it's header).
3 HotAir, what a waste. Many of the links go back to your second blog link. But at least HotAir links to Politico. Which, despite originally being started by the GOP, is good enough as a source.
Politico states: http://www.politico.com/news/s...
After she won the June 8 primary, Angle gave her actual website a well-publicized facelift and reworded many of her positions on issues including Social Security and Second Amendment rights — statements that as written might have aided Angle in the primary, but would likely be a liability in the general election.
Funny. That actually sounds like what Reid's campaign was saying.
Hall said the website did not have any mechanism to collect the e-mail addresses, adding: “If someone entered data, it did not go anywhere.”
Oops.
Let's check the score:
Election fraud unrelated to fake websites: 1 (to be fair will give your this one)
Democrat funded sites that collect information: 0
Number of NRCC sites that actually collect information: 16
Number of NRCC sites that actually collect donations: 16
Number of on-topic and credible links you provided: 0/3
see "Americans for a Conservative Direction" which is running all sorts of TV ads trying to convince average Republicans to support "comprehensive immigration reform" by pretending to be a Republican-aligned group that's serious about things like tough border control....... except that it's manned by several "rinos" (NOT conservatives) and it's "deep pockets" include Bill Gates (Lib Dem) and Zuckerberg (hardly a conservative) who've both been pushing to eliminate all the immigration limits and H1B visa limits. It's a trick.
Then there was "Republicans for Obama" back in 2012.....
The really funny one was intra-party in 2012 when the Romneys funded something which IIRC was called "Evangelicals for Romney" ..... (for those not familiar with basic protestant theological matters, "evangelicals" consider Mormonism to be a cult whose teachings are anti-Biblical so that one was basically an oxymoron.... about equivalent to "serious Catholics for Imam Yousef" or some such thing)
This sort of stuff feeds on itself with the consultants on all campaigns learning from each-other, so people just need to grow up and learn to see through it (and look into ANY political website or organization.
Stop /. redirecting you to it @ least, by adding THIS to your hosts file:
216.34.181.45 slashdot.org
216.34.181.45 beta.slashdot.org
216.34.181.46 images.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 it.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 developers.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 yro.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 mobile.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 news.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 ask.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 tech.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 apple.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 books.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 games.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 hardware.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 interviews.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 linux.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 science.slashdot.org
216.34.181.48 idle.slashdot.org
* :)
THAT will block out their ability to redirect you to it whatsoever - Especially the 2nd line item from the top/BOLDED entry line above...
(You're welcome)
APK
P.S.=> To import, sort, deduplication, create & manage a custom hosts file easily that does not only THAT (secures you vs. redirects @ the DNS or even site level), but also gives you more speed, security, reliablity, & even anonymity, use this (shameless plug, details of what custom hosts give you in FULL are listed here) -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...
... apk
There are equivalencies to be made across the parties. This is not one of them.
That's odd. I remember it the other way around in my State of Michigan. Republicans running fake democrats.
http://wincountry.com/news/articles/2012/jul/18/prosecutor-says-roy-schmidt-and-jace-bolger-schemed-to-undermine-election/
Or news reporters running sound alike candidates:
http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/region/detroit/dugeon-vs-duggan-did-leduff-encourage-write-in-candidate-with-confusing-name-to-run-for-mayor
If we took the politicians' power away or diluted it, they wouldn't spend so much time fighting for the position. Let's go back to 1 representative for every 35,000 people. Just like it says in the constitution.
http://billofrightsinstitute.org/resources/educator-resources/americapedia/americapedia-constitution-text/house-of-representatives/
On TONS of levels vs. hosts files. For a list of 17++ of those see here http://start64.com/index.php?o...
(Enjoy!)
APK
P.S.=> Hosts not only block ads (better than "almost all ads blocked by default") but TONS of other online threats, + they yield you more SPEED (block ads & hardcode your fav. sites for faster resoolution AND stopping DNS flawed redirection), SECURITY (vs. kjnown malicious code on sites, adbanners that are poisoned, fastflux & dynamic + normal botnet designs etc.), RELIABILITY (vs. downed or redirect poisoned DNS servers - a HUGE problem out there) & even added anonymity to a degree (vs. DNS request logs + DNSBL override ability locally)... apk
One would have to be a complete Idiot be tricked by them. The text on the screen is there for a reason, Folks! Read it!
Am I the only one who's thinking that this Dr. Bellamy's patients should probably reconsider the wisdom of seeing a physician who can't be bothered to notice a BOLD warning RIGHT next to the "donate" button? I mean, if he's missing this kind of thing, what else (potentially life-threatening) is he missing?
Just sayin'...
democrats complaining others are using their tactics of lie, cheat, steal(?!?!?!?) PRICELESS!!!!! Yet another reason to invite democrats, facists, socialists, communists, humanists, etc. to give up their citizenship and move to the socialist country of their choice at their own expense!
The Beta interface for Slashdot is a ditry trick as bad as what the GOP might be doing. It has the effect of changing a discussion into a blog wit all the opinion suppression attributes of a blog and of social media generally. Compare it to Google Groups and Google+ and Facebook and you will get that the change is for the benefit of the marketers and business spys and not for our conversation and debate.
Fuck Beta, Fuck Dice!
That's what it is so report nrcc to google and makethem vanish from search results.