Internet Anonymity and freedom of speech

[Guest strelcevina]

i remember a time in 1996/97 when i connected full time internet at home.

few years after you couldn't open a single website without all Porn pop-ups taking over a PC.

porn industry and gambling dominated Internet for few years, until government issued some regulations,

that is why right now u don't see Porn just popping in to your face for no reason.

Today's Forums are just beginning of something big.... just like churches ,restaurants or any other public place it will have government regulations

right now nobody don't know witch direction social internet is going, it is just matters of time.

[mikegideon]

I just use my real name to begin with. I'm pretty much the same on TGO as I am in person. I know the real names of a few posters in this thread, and even know where 6.8 AR lives

Folks have their reasons for using screen names, and it's their right to do so. Like Like lester said, if there was a "hell no" button, that would have been my vote.

[Guest Drewsett]

i remember a time in 1996/97 when i connected full time internet at home.

few years after you couldn't open a single website without all Porn pop-ups taking over a PC.

porn industry and gambling dominated Internet for few years, until government issued some regulations,

that is why right now u don't see Porn just popping in to your face for no reason.

Today's Forums are just beginning of something big.... just like churches ,restaurants or any other public place it will have government regulations

right now nobody don't know witch direction social internet is going, it is just matters of time.

Actually you're completely wrong. The government didn't regulate anything. Internet browsers just got better at blocking popups. The only attempts the government has made to regulate the internet have been struck down as unconstitutional.

[mikegideon]

Actually you're completely wrong. The government didn't regulate anything. Internet browsers just got better at blocking popups. The only attempts the government has made to regulate the internet have been struck down as unconstitutional.

Imagine that

[Will Carry]

Holy Crap! I meant to vote NO. I bet the other two guys that voted yes did the same thing.

[enfield]

Gun Forums + Freedom Of speech = BS

Gun Forums including this one just portending that they believe on freedom of speech,

reality is that Gun forums including TGO are run like Online Dictatorships.

Erasing posts or changing them ,just like Joseph Stalin did with his pictures.. he would just erase his formal friends :)lol

i was just recently Banned for a week for voicing my opinion in respectful manner, according to forum rules.

Excuse for baning me for a week was ,

and i quote one of Moderators:

'""'The inflammatory infraction and temporary ban wasn't for that one single post. It was for several of your posts here. Most of your post seem to have that kind of tone to them. I think most members here can respect the fact that you have a very different opinion about topics then the typical right-wing gun owner. What gets under people's skin is your inflammatory, passive-aggressiveness, and many times, the "I'm better then you" attitude you have when discussing those topics. I personally have received several complaints on your post here. I have no idea how many complaints the other mods and David have received. I'd guess it's quite a few."""

Strel, you don't seem to understand what the 1st Amendment to the Constitution says. It says that the Federal government cannot restrict your speech.

This forum isn't part of the Federal government. Your demand for free speech here conflicts with TGO David's property right, as he is the owner of this web site.

You ARE free to say anything you damn well please, but you CAN'T SAY IT HERE!

You are free to register a domain name, hire a hosting company, create your own website, and say anything you please!

Is that clear?

[Guest strelcevina]

Strel, you don't seem to understand what the 1st Amendment to the Constitution says. It says that the Federal government cannot restrict your speech.

This forum isn't part of the Federal government. Your demand for free speech here conflicts with TGO David's property right, as he is the owner of this web site.

You ARE free to say anything you damn well please, but you CAN'T SAY IT HERE!

You are free to register a domain name, hire a hosting company, create your own website, and say anything you please!

Is that clear?

Actually Owner of this site allowed speech on this forum and gave specific rules to follow.

so so far i obey those rules ,i should have right to use my free speech.

and all you wrote above comes from somebody who allegedly supports Freedom of speech .

you should be ashamed of your self to say something like that,

i contest that freedom of speech is only good if you use it,

and don't forget that soon you leave your house you are walking on somebody private property ,

so basically all you believe is a lie

[Guest Drewsett]

Actually Owner of this site allowed speech on this forum and gave specific rules to follow.

so so far i obey those rules ,i should have right to use my free speech.

i contest that freedom of speech is only good if you use it,

and don't forget that soon you leave your house you are walking on somebody private property ,

so basically all you believe is a lie

Strel, you grasp enough of American law to make you extremely difficult to argue with. The problem is that you don't understand the nuances of the US code. There are cases where something designated a "public forum" whether it be private property or not, protect freedom of speech. This is why people like the KKK can't be banned from the Walmart sidewalk. Walmart's allowance of people to sell products, like the Girl Scouts, and to solicit money, like the Salvation Army, has been found in federal court to designate their sidewalk as a "public forum", which means that even though it is private property, it is subject to 1A.

This is not a "public forum". The requirement of registration and membership make this a private forum, and it retains its private property status.

Yes, I agree, freedom of speech is only defended through use. I don't believe in any form of government censorship, so long as the behavior that would be censored is not unlawful (which is why we can censor things like child pornography). Censoring speech, even hate speech, only breeds the obsession with the forbidden. Allowing all lawful speech is cathartic, and it makes our society better as a whole.

And as far as being on private property as soon as I leave my house, you are exaggerating a great deal. The "public forum" status of many properties applies, and all roads, parks, federal, state, and city buildings are government property. The airwaves of your television and radio are, at least as far as the law is concerned, owned by the government, which means that broadcast television and radio can be censored, but cable and pay radio aren't.

Study the law a little more Strel, you just need a little better understanding.

And no, I'm not a lawyer, but I am in or have taken over 16 hours of college courses on media law and 1A and 4A. The lawyers on here will probably back me up, even if I made a few generalizations in the interest of brevity.

[Guest strelcevina]

This is not a "public forum". The requirement of registration and membership make this a private forum, and it retains its private property status.

.

Let me just stay on that subject

like i said in above post #26

Forums are just beginning of something big.

people don't socialize in person anymore,

more than 50% of times all of us socialize online Forums

and Good Forums are Generating rather Large income to be ignored.

i bet you that government will find a way how to push their rules up on forums to.

BTW i voted NO. i believe in my right to call my self Strelcevina

[Guest Drewsett]

Can't refute me, eh?

Unless the Supreme Court really changes a lot, I don't see them overturning established 1A precedent and allowing legislation like you've described. Quit trolling, Strel. I realize that's like telling the sun to not come up... but maybe it will work this time.

[Guest strelcevina]

I realize that's like telling the sun to not come up... but maybe it will work this time.

its going down right now so it works 50% of times

[vontar]

I bet if you ask this question in a non Gun forum, the results would be very different.

[mikegideon]

I bet if you ask this question in a non Gun forum, the results would be very different.

Why?

[Mike.357]

yeah, what does a gun forum have to do with it?

[TGO David]

Stelcevina's account seems to have been put on a train to Siberia. Eat it, Comrade.

[NextExit]

I doubt many of the people on here would say the things they say if they were face to face.

Not just on the internet, how about the CB? Ever listen to that? I heard this one guy spewing racist slurs towards black people and this black guy had a great response... he wanted to know why the only time you hear racism is on the CB but when you're at a loading dock, a truck stop, or a restaurant, you don't hear that racism anymore? Some people have to hide behind a microphone to spew their hatred.

[Punisher84]

Stelcevina's account seems to have been put on a train to Siberia. Eat it, Comrade.

Thank. God.

[mikegideon]

Eat it, Comrade.

[Oh Shoot]

Heh heh. He said Comrade.

- OS

[Guest Drewsett]

I'm honored to have played the role that I did in this momentous occasion.

[Guest db99wj]

I'm honored to have played the role that I did in this momentous occasion.

Dang. Missed this one. Punisher is a prick and will tell ya what he thinks, its that Irish in him or something. That why I like him!

[mikegideon]

Heh heh. He said Comrade.

- OS

Guess I have a warped sense of humor

[Raoul]

Yet another reason to honor 1A.

[Punisher84]

Dang. Missed this one. Punisher is a prick and will tell ya what he thinks, its that Irish in him or something. That why I like him!

[Guest Lester Weevils]

The anonymity versus unpopular speechifying in the internet age has some similarity to the way it has been in the past, and some differences of course.

Soapboxing hasn't entirely gone away, but in the past it was a pretty big part of public discourse--

Soapbox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A soapbox is a raised platform on which one stands to make an impromptu speech, often about a political subject. The term originates from the days when speakers would elevate themselves by standing on a wooden crate originally used for shipment of soap or other dry goods from a manufacturer to a retail store.

The term is also used metaphorically to describe a person engaging in often flamboyant impromptu or unofficial public speaking, as in the phrases "He's on his soapbox", or "Get off your soapbox." Hyde Park, London is known for its Sunday soapbox orators, who have assembled at Speakers' Corner since 1872 to discuss religion, politics and other topics. A modern form of the soapbox is a blog: a website on which a user publishes one's thoughts to whomever reads the page.

...

Additional problems could be presented to street corner orators from rival political groups or hecklers. A skilled and effective "soapboxer" had to be quick on his feet, figuratively and sometimes literally, having the ability to express political opinions with clarity, to have ready answers for common objections, to be able to deflect hostility with humor or satire, and to be able to face difficulty or danger with fortitude. Soapboxing proved to be what one historian has called "a hard, but nevertheless necessary, process in the development of revolutionary leaders."

Soapboxers were sometimes exposed to physical violence. In 1901, the Irish socialist James Connolly was conducting an impromptu "street meeting" at Oxford University when he was assaulted by a band of undergraduates and unemployed workers. They chased Connolly through the town, throwing stones at him, which caused him to retaliate with the flagpole of the red flag which he was carrying, laying out four of his assailants before police intervened. This incident was far from isolated.

Speakers' Corner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since that time it has become a traditional site for public speeches and debate as well as the main site of protest and assembly in Britain. There are some who contend that the tradition has a connection with the Tyburn hanging gallows where the condemned man was allowed to speak.

Although many of its regular speakers are non-mainstream, Speakers' Corner was frequented by Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, George Orwell, C. L. R. James, Ben Tillett, Marcus Garvey, Kwame Nkrumah and William Morris. Its existence is frequently upheld as a demonstration of free speech, as anyone can turn up unannounced and talk on almost any subject, though they are likely to be heckled by regulars. Lord Justice Sedley, in his decision regarding Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions (1999), described Speakers' Corner as demonstrating "the tolerance which is both extended by the law to opinion of every kind and expected by the law in the conduct of those who disagree, even strongly, with what they hear." The ruling famously established in English case law that freedom of speech could not be limited to the inoffensive but extended also to "the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome, and the provocative, as long as such speech did not tend to provoke violence", and that the right to free speech accorded by Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights also accorded the right to be offensive.

===

There are enough random crazy stalker-type people nowadays that it isn't necessarily a fantastic idea to express strong opinions online if they can be traced back to the source, though anonymity is not assured on the current internet.

In repressive nations, anonymity is even more important if even an "innocent" comment might get a person arrested or executed.

A whistleblower would wish anonymity before spouting off on the internet. Certain folk could lose jobs or wreck careers by expressing honest but unpopular opinions. If a fellow makes a controversial statement, causing activist groups to boycott or harass his employer, then the fellow might find himself very expendable on the payroll.

During the American Revolution, pamphleteering was the equivalent of blogging. Many inflammatory pamphlets had anonymous authors. Those guys may have been brave, but didn't necessarily want to be hung just for publishing an essay.

Copy machines and fax machines were anonymous and seditious in the old USSR, a similar situation to the American Revolution pamphleteers.

===

On the other hand, is intentional trolling or abusive long-distance verbal behavior new to the internet? Or were there historical equivalents?

Thousands of years ago did emperors, priests or scribes trade long-distance insults via courier-delivered scrolls and tablets?

After the invention of the telegraph did telegraph operators trade insults cross-country?

Prank phone calls may be similar to classic trolling. Abusive radio traffic was earlier mentioned. The FCC frowns on such if the perps are caught.

There was bullying via anonymous letters or notes, in grade school and the adult world. Whispering campaigns to ruin a person's reputation. Insulting anonymous graffiti. "For a good time call Gloria at BR-549"

Those are trivial examples. Are there more significant examples of historical anonymous abuse?

Edited February 7, 2011 by Lester Weevils