Mandatory Internet Censorship in Australia (3 Viewers)

[Lauchlan]

snowfox stop fucking replying just ignore the penk

define 'penk' please.

 

[Lauchlan]

YouTube - Phoney Tony caught out.wmv

here's an example of a fail.

 

[mirakon]

im quite proud of my 2 red bars tyvm.

explain how my logic and reasoning is wrong when i haven't even taken part in the debate recently. i think you should check yours.

these threads are meant for intellectual intelligent debate, of course interspersed with troll humour, not fail logic such as that which you contribute. so yeah, gtfo.

 

[Lauchlan]

these threads are meant for intellectual intelligent debate, of course interspersed with troll humour, not fail logic such as that which you contribute. so yeah, gtfo.

towards the beginning many people were discussing porn sites. you call that intellectual intelligent debate?

by the way anyone who is actually intelligent would never describe the debate as 'intellectual intelligent'. CHRIST.

 

[mirakon]

whoop de doo! Now that you're losing an argument you're dissecting my argument in accordance to semantics and grammar. That's completely irrelevant. Furthermore, yeah people were discussing porn, what's wrong with that? It's natural for teenagers to want sources of sexual pleasure, there's nothing wrong with it. Please try to stay on topic.

 

[Lauchlan]

whoop de doo! Now that you're losing an argument you're dissecting my argument in accordance to semantics and grammar. That's completely irrelevant. Furthermore, yeah people were discussing porn, what's wrong with that? It's natural for teenagers to want sources of sexual pleasure, there's nothing wrong with it. Please try to stay on topic.

1. i put forward my argument before criticising your writing skills. once again you automatically assume im losing the argument when the argument is still in motion! give me a response that doesnt make idiotic assumptions on who is winning (you dont decide that anyway).

2. naming porn websites on a filter discussion thread is not appropriate. im not saying its wrong (again, your putting words in my mouth) but its the wrong time and place ect.
some self-respecting people actually entered the thread and were disgusted - so people outside of your bias world actually like discretion tyvm!

3. i am on topic - when responding to this please stay on topic ie. address the argument i put forward (see below)

it is inapproprite to discuss pornography sites on BoS.

 

[Rothbard]

1. i put forward my argument before criticising your writing skills. once again you automatically assume im losing the argument when the argument is still in motion! give me a response that doesnt make idiotic assumptions on who is winning (you dont decide that anyway).

2. naming porn websites on a filter discussion thread is not appropriate. im not saying its wrong (again, your putting words in my mouth) but its the wrong time and place ect.
some self-respecting people actually entered the thread and were discusted - so people outside of your bias world actually like discretion tyvm!

3. i am on topic - when responding to this please stay on topic ie. address the argument i put forward (see below)

it is inapproprite to discuss pornography sites on BoS.

mcfucking kill yourself
​

 

[Lauchlan]

mcfucking kill yourself
​

no, i ordered the quarter pounder fool

 

[SnowFox]

towards the beginning many people were discussing porn sites. you call that intellectual intelligent debate?

by the way anyone who is actually intelligent would never describe the debate as 'intellectual intelligent'. CHRIST.

Actually it was a separate conversation all together after i mentioned a porn site that will probably be blocked. It died relatively quickly when cluster-fucks such as yourself came along and said filter= good.


BTW from your namesakes website melinda.

Good to see you had your FB admin ban me when i practically tore apart your argument on the internet filter.

I mays well post it here so the public can see it.

The filter will not work. It is as simple as that.
They tested this filter out in a Yr 7 class. It took less then 10 mins for one of them to breach it via a proxy site.
The money used to even fund the development of this filter could of been given to the AFP to combat Child Pornography (CP) distribution via P2P networks, the same network which piracy and illegal pornography is vastly distributed and the same network which this filter does not cover.

Australian ISP's already have websites which host CP blacklisted and home users are banned from viewing them. Senator Conroy should be giving the ISP's the list of banned sites so they can add the CP distributors to the blacklist.

Australias network speeds are one of the slowest in the world, we do not need a filter slowing it down even more.

The government could save money by sending every family a Internet nanny (practically a filter) program. This program is constantly updated against all things evil and parents/caregivers have complete control on internet viewing. They also could take a page from Microsoft and show them how to set the computer so users can not search for certain things.

Senator Conroy let slip on the 7PM project that the filter is practically designed on China Great Firewall. so you dropping the debate because you found a speaker on your team was a advocate for the chinese filter is rather daft.

You are supporting Censorship, and a Chinese designed firewall.

@ Melinda L.

So someone cant take a joke?

@ Melinda T.R.

This is the sort of thing Australians as a whole should be afraid of when it comes to a government controlled web filter. It shouldnt be even called a filter. Calling it a filter suggests it goes through websites and takes the bad stuff out. It doesnt even do this. It blacklists the site all together. It should be called "Australia's Equivalent to the Great Chinese Firewall", because that is what it will be. Did you know some countries are using OUR law system to attack freedom of speech. You know we have Draconian laws when you have that. Or like when the former South Australian Attorney General tried imposing laws on bloggers to use their real names when criticising the current government. That was short lived. Thank god he ate his hat and resigned.

Melinda T.R. tried using the argument that searching something innocent like Blue Orchard into google will bring up child harming websites. Did this myself just to check. Got wikipedia links and links to information about flowers. Then i did the same with Safe Search off (default on, hard to switch) and still had the same. Search engines, such as google and yahoo use two methods to searching-
#1- Sponsored links, these appear at the top because they have paid to have them there. Google and Yahoo do not allow inappropriate sites to sponsored.
#2- Order of relevance. Pretty simple, Computers at google, lets call them Bots for ease of peoples minds, go through websites every day and find key words. Think of them as Politically Correct, White Hat trogan virus' with no ill effect on anyone. A symbiotic artificial organism. These bots then send the info back and google portrays this onto its search engine.

RC material is not illegal to own. It IS illegal to sell though.
Child Pornography is not RC. Its illegal altogether.

The money used to even design this "filter" could of been given to the AFP so they can track creators, distributors and buyers of child pornography on P2P networks a lot easier.

Melinda L-
"When a person is blocked on a fan page, all of their content is removed, not just the offensive ones. I saw no point in just removing individual offensive posts when the person who posted them is likely to post more of the same. Robust argument is fine and there is lots of that here and on the fan page. But if people are going to be offensive, they will be removed. Simple as that."

You know what, my 2 years of Information Software and Technology, 2 years of Information Computers and Technology, 2 years of Information Technology and 2 years of Information Programming and Technology not only allows me to know what happens when something or someone is blacklisted, it also gives me the ability to know that neither you, Melinda Tankard Reist and Senator Conroy combined could even begin to imagine how unfathomably irresponsible and ludicrous this filter is.

"Ooo my filter protects kiddies, i have no proof to back this up, and its public knowledge a year 7 student BROKE the prototype, but hey PROTECT kiddies!"

"Ooo who said protect kiddies, he must be right!"

 

[Jazuzi]

no1 cares about this anymore jesus fuck seriously

 

[Lauchlan]

Actually it was a separate conversation all together after i mentioned a porn site that will probably be blocked. It died relatively quickly when cluster-fucks such as yourself came along and said filter= good.


BTW from your namesakes website melinda.

it only died because i butted in. still pretty pathetic on your part for trying to protect it by saying "its separate". i never said "filter = good". there you go again.....

no1 cares about this anymore jesus fuck seriously

+1

 

[mirakon]

i agree with the principle behind this policy which is to deny the publuc access to selected 'inappropriate' material.

Q.E.D Proof that you love the concept of an internet filter

Actually, I'll stop feeding the troll now. It's not nearly as fun as it first was.

 

[nevery]

q.e.d proof that you love the concept of an internet filter

actually, i'll stop feeding the troll now. It's not nearly as fun as it first was.

+1

 

[Lauchlan]

Q.E.D Proof that you love the concept of an internet filter

Actually, I'll stop feeding the troll now. It's not nearly as fun as it first was.

duh everyone knows that i agree with a working, effective filter concept. thats common knowledge.

 

[SnowFox]

duh everyone knows that i agree with a working, effective filter concept. thats common knowledge.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A WORKING, EFFECTIVE FILTER.




Fuck.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

bahahahahaha

Ok, in the <1% chance lauchlan is actually serious,

myfaithinhumanity = myfaithinhumanity - 2567893257835789013578901578601576015760

 

[mirakon]

OBJECTION!!!!!!!!!

- 2567893257835789013578901578601576015760</SPAN> cannot equal zero therefore YOU ARE WRONG Phoenix Fury.

Oh my God, seriously I'm so sorry man, but the maths nerd in me couldn't resist.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

I'm far into the subzeros regarding my faith in humanity.

Though there are certainly some excellent ones around, they cannot make up for the mass of shitcunts.

 

[Slidey]

Fuck Lauchlan is one of the shittest dumbcunts I've seen on BoS in a while.

 

[Slidey]

OBJECTION!!!!!!!!!

- 2567893257835789013578901578601576015760</SPAN> cannot equal zero therefore YOU ARE WRONG Phoenix Fury.

Oh my God, seriously I'm so sorry man, but the maths nerd in me couldn't resist.

That was an infix variable assignment, not the relational operator for equality. So even the maths nerd in you shouldn't get upset because mathematics contains algorithms and indeed computer science is a subset of maths.

Although granted it should probably have been the more language agnostic := symbol.