If it could be worse, then that means the current situation must be good! A family member was murdered? Oh, please! Your entire family could've been murdered! Therefore, your current situation is a good thing.
Perhaps she wasn't lying but was merely acting upon causes that she found worthy. Just because you disagree with some of her actions doesn't mean that she was lying.
That all depends on what you see as harmful. Some people merely like doing different things than other people. So while you may see it as "harmful" and think they need "help," other people simply don't care.
As I said in my other comment, the same could be said of just about anything. And not everyone is anonymous on the internet, anyway (and even if everyone wasn't, there wouldn't be a whole lot you could do if they said something you didn't like). Again, you just have to know where to look. Verify the information, too.
No, humans inhabit both spaces. But, give people anonymity and suddenly they feel free to say and do anything (including say what ever they think you want to hear or will make them sound smart).
There's not much you could do even if they weren't anonymous. Not only that, but not everyone is anonymous on the internet. There are, as far as I know, plenty of reputable sources. Just as there can be incorrect information in books, the same can be said of the internet. You just have to know where to look for the good information (and double checking the information would help, I think).
The internet is a terrible, TERRIBLE, source for a proper scientific education free from bias.
Right. Because of humans. Luckily humans don't make books or any other sources of information. They just dwell on the internet, and there's absolutely no useful information there! That's why you can accept everything you hear or read as long as it didn't come from the internet.
If a kid is cussing in a paper, the paper is poorly written
Really? Poorly written by whose standards? I don't think something is poorly written merely because it contains cuss words.
By high school they should know that that's totally inappropriate.
What I think is totally inappropriate is people teaching kids that certain words are somehow factually bad because the magical moral fairy told them so.
As far as I know, there are no words that can cause harm to people. I don't think that a word needs to be banned just because some people are offended by it (and I don't think many people are offended by the words you mentioned, to be honest).
It doesn't look like a reasonable list, in my opinion. They're just words like anything else to me. If they say them, I couldn't care less. What a waste of time. "We think these words are bad. Some people could, potentially, be offended by them. Therefore, we're going to punish anyone who says them."
a mistake that could potentially cost them a job if their adult life
Really? I don't think it works like that.
Either way, it is perfectly appropriate for the school to take some kind of action.
Perhaps to you. Not to me, however. I'd rather not live in a society where people believe that censorship is good or that certain words are somehow factually "bad."
What kind of retardation do you have? "oh look at me, I never said it was an improvement, I never said it was not an improvement. I am waving my hands around making no sense at all, look how clever I think I am!"
If you'll reread my comment, I never actually mentioned time zones or anything of the like. I just replied to his vague statement that seemed to be talking about anything and everything with one of my own.
Since this is just based on preference: it is to me. And his argument was vague as well. He only mentioned that if something is not broken, you should not fix it. He did not add any context. He phrased it in a way that made it sound like he was talking about everything and every situation (at least to me).
Or, more simply: the issues (if there even ARE any, which I'd say there are not) with time zones are far lesser than the issues that would be caused by abolishing time zones (let alone the issues that would be caused by not having time zones -- problems adjusting as well as problems simply using).
That depends on what you define as an issue. Some people may not have issues with something someone else does.
And how, exactly, would this even be an improvement?
My comment was intentionally vague. I never actually mentioned that this is an improvement. I was just implying that I thought the particular argument he used wasn't very good.
Then again, I suppose I shouldn't have expected more from a person who compares the pron industry to the Jews.
Have you ever heard of an analogy? He was saying it was vaguely similar in one or more ways. That does not mean he was saying that it's as "bad" as what happened in the event that he's vaguely comparing it to. It simply means that it might be similar in one or more ways (like, for instance, the fact that no one will be able to stand up for you if you're the only one left).
You DO force kids to view porn by using Innocent names
I know. I force all of them to type in those names.
Whats your explanation for porn spam?
What explanation? I don't care about it. But not everyone spams porn.
And if you dont have a adult responce dont bother replying.
What is an "adult response" and how is that relevant? A "childish response" could still have a valid point. Not to mention that that is completely subjective.
And will it kill children to see porn,no but thats not YOUR right to deside its the parents.
What is or is not a right is up to the law to decide. It's not a right, but neither is it a right for you to decide what domain names people are allowed to use in what is likely most circumstances. Perhaps they should monitor their children more often. Their problem.
How in the world did you find out about our evil scheme to hold children hostage and force them to look at pornography websites? The possibility that a child could accidentally look at pornography was also part of our plan. Their entire lives will be obliterated from looking at pornography!
I think the idea is to force all porn sites across to the.xxx domain eventually
Sounds like a stupid idea to me. For what purpose? How could they possibly force every single porn website in existence (even unidentified ones) to use the.xxx domain? That'd be quite hard to enforce. And who would want to enforce it?
I doubt this is their idea at all.
it could become a feature of your ISP that all.xxx domains are blocked by default
For what? People who could probably be considered overprotective parents? If they want to "protect" their children from something I deem as harmless, then I think they should be the ones doing the work.
Not only that, but this kind of blocking is ineffective if the user knows even a little bit about computers (and even if they don't, I'm sure they can follow simple instructions).
Slashdot Mirror
but information that can probably get a person and their family killed should be passed around for all the world to see?
When has that happened?
Glad you have your priorities straight.
Or perhaps someone just has different priorities than you.
Which, of course, means that the thing that isn't as bad is actually good! "Worse," "good," and "bad" are subjective, anyway.
If it could be worse, then that means the current situation must be good! A family member was murdered? Oh, please! Your entire family could've been murdered! Therefore, your current situation is a good thing.
Google is bad. Therefore, anything less bad must be good and/or can't be criticized!
Yes, I agree. If people aren't happy and do want to change, I think they should be able to get help.
If you cry wolf enough times
Perhaps she wasn't lying but was merely acting upon causes that she found worthy. Just because you disagree with some of her actions doesn't mean that she was lying.
That all depends on what you see as harmful. Some people merely like doing different things than other people. So while you may see it as "harmful" and think they need "help," other people simply don't care.
Yeah. Those invisible exceptions to free speech sure are nice.
As I said in my other comment, the same could be said of just about anything. And not everyone is anonymous on the internet, anyway (and even if everyone wasn't, there wouldn't be a whole lot you could do if they said something you didn't like). Again, you just have to know where to look. Verify the information, too.
No, humans inhabit both spaces. But, give people anonymity and suddenly they feel free to say and do anything (including say what ever they think you want to hear or will make them sound smart).
There's not much you could do even if they weren't anonymous. Not only that, but not everyone is anonymous on the internet. There are, as far as I know, plenty of reputable sources. Just as there can be incorrect information in books, the same can be said of the internet. You just have to know where to look for the good information (and double checking the information would help, I think).
The internet is a terrible, TERRIBLE, source for a proper scientific education free from bias.
Right. Because of humans. Luckily humans don't make books or any other sources of information. They just dwell on the internet, and there's absolutely no useful information there! That's why you can accept everything you hear or read as long as it didn't come from the internet.
If a kid is cussing in a paper, the paper is poorly written
Really? Poorly written by whose standards? I don't think something is poorly written merely because it contains cuss words.
By high school they should know that that's totally inappropriate.
What I think is totally inappropriate is people teaching kids that certain words are somehow factually bad because the magical moral fairy told them so.
The words that can actually cause harm to people
As far as I know, there are no words that can cause harm to people. I don't think that a word needs to be banned just because some people are offended by it (and I don't think many people are offended by the words you mentioned, to be honest).
It doesn't look like a reasonable list, in my opinion. They're just words like anything else to me. If they say them, I couldn't care less. What a waste of time. "We think these words are bad. Some people could, potentially, be offended by them. Therefore, we're going to punish anyone who says them."
a mistake that could potentially cost them a job if their adult life
Really? I don't think it works like that.
Either way, it is perfectly appropriate for the school to take some kind of action.
Perhaps to you. Not to me, however. I'd rather not live in a society where people believe that censorship is good or that certain words are somehow factually "bad."
I really don't get how this is helping anything. They say/search for words (perhaps not even in an intentionally "dirty" way). So what?
Bad words are horrible and must be blocked immediately. They will corrupt the minds of the children!
I can understand the school's desire to maintain a certain level of maturity
Yeah. Anyone who uses these words is clearly immature. That's my opinion (which makes it a universal fact).
What kind of retardation do you have? "oh look at me, I never said it was an improvement, I never said it was not an improvement. I am waving my hands around making no sense at all, look how clever I think I am!"
If you'll reread my comment, I never actually mentioned time zones or anything of the like. I just replied to his vague statement that seemed to be talking about anything and everything with one of my own.
It's not as weak as you'd think.
Since this is just based on preference: it is to me. And his argument was vague as well. He only mentioned that if something is not broken, you should not fix it. He did not add any context. He phrased it in a way that made it sound like he was talking about everything and every situation (at least to me).
Or, more simply: the issues (if there even ARE any, which I'd say there are not) with time zones are far lesser than the issues that would be caused by abolishing time zones (let alone the issues that would be caused by not having time zones -- problems adjusting as well as problems simply using).
That depends on what you define as an issue. Some people may not have issues with something someone else does.
And how, exactly, would this even be an improvement?
My comment was intentionally vague. I never actually mentioned that this is an improvement. I was just implying that I thought the particular argument he used wasn't very good.
In that case, a gradual change (rather than no change at all) would probably be the solution.
Yeah. Why bother trying to improve anything? If it isn't completely broken, don't try to fix it.
Then again, I suppose I shouldn't have expected more from a person who compares the pron industry to the Jews.
Have you ever heard of an analogy? He was saying it was vaguely similar in one or more ways. That does not mean he was saying that it's as "bad" as what happened in the event that he's vaguely comparing it to. It simply means that it might be similar in one or more ways (like, for instance, the fact that no one will be able to stand up for you if you're the only one left).
You DO force kids to view porn by using Innocent names
I know. I force all of them to type in those names.
Whats your explanation for porn spam?
What explanation? I don't care about it. But not everyone spams porn.
And if you dont have a adult responce dont bother replying.
What is an "adult response" and how is that relevant? A "childish response" could still have a valid point. Not to mention that that is completely subjective.
And will it kill children to see porn,no but thats not YOUR right to deside its the parents.
What is or is not a right is up to the law to decide. It's not a right, but neither is it a right for you to decide what domain names people are allowed to use in what is likely most circumstances. Perhaps they should monitor their children more often. Their problem.
How in the world did you find out about our evil scheme to hold children hostage and force them to look at pornography websites? The possibility that a child could accidentally look at pornography was also part of our plan. Their entire lives will be obliterated from looking at pornography!
I think the idea is to force all porn sites across to the .xxx domain eventually
Sounds like a stupid idea to me. For what purpose? How could they possibly force every single porn website in existence (even unidentified ones) to use the .xxx domain? That'd be quite hard to enforce. And who would want to enforce it?
I doubt this is their idea at all.
it could become a feature of your ISP that all .xxx domains are blocked by default
For what? People who could probably be considered overprotective parents? If they want to "protect" their children from something I deem as harmless, then I think they should be the ones doing the work.
Not only that, but this kind of blocking is ineffective if the user knows even a little bit about computers (and even if they don't, I'm sure they can follow simple instructions).