9 ms·

Further Freedom Attacks

191 points by daeken 16y ago

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
tomjen3 16y ago
Does anybody know why nobody has sued over this yet? it has to be blatantly unconstitutional.
- Vivtek 16y ago
  Because it happened yesterday?
- elbrodeur 16y ago
  I'm not an expert but it seems to be legal and even constitutional. It's offensive, but if you mad-libbed the story, I'm betting it would seem less offensive. The US Government siezed __number__ of __noun plural__ because of suspected __illegal verb__. I was upset when I read the headlines as well. Mostly because of what I inferred -- not because of what happened. My only worry is that one sad effect of this precedent might be people having their domains taken from them because a small number of users use the service for illegal activity. EDIT: There's another post on the front page right now which says what I wanted to say much more eloquently: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1946154 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1946154
cool-RR 16y ago
Final sentence: We cannot take this sitting down. This must not be allowed to stand. So... We let it sit down, and we have to stand?
- lukeschlather 16y ago
  We stand up and knock it on its ass. This is a blatant violation of due process.
NginUS 16y ago
Still beats syphilis experiments or sarin/VX testing.
- ericb 16y ago
  But maybe not the evils the government commits tomorrow which we won't hear about because of censorship.
  - J3L2404 16y ago
    The arc of history is long but it bends toward freedom.
    - NginUS 16y ago
      I agree completely. What I can't be sure of is whether these actions are indeed a step in the wrong direction- at least for the time being. Just maybe it's not what it seems. When Bernanke starts recklessly printing money the way he did recently- that seems like a panic-driven survivalist effort to me, and I begin wondering if this isn't more of the same. China's got us by the balls alright. I'm sure there's some twisting going on that only the government higher-ups can see, to warrant these reactions of late.
      - ericb 16y ago
        > China's got us by the balls alright. Not sure about that. I think debtors have more power than creditors. After you have a client refuse to pay you, you start to see creditor/debtor power balance in a different light.
        robryan 16y ago
        In the short term possibly, but in the long term refusing to pay a debt such as that would make it impossible for America to source credit.
        16y ago
nodata 16y ago
I find situations like this extremely difficult to understand. I really don't get it at all. Either we have a system where you are innocent until proven guilty, have a right to a fair trial, good evidence has to exist, you have a right to privacy, a right to trial by jury, no corruption, no torture, etc. etc. or we don't. That's it. We are continually chasing our tail re-asking questions about when each of these things is appropriate and when they are not. So here's my solution: we make a list. Each time people ask these same questions again and again and again, we point at the list. It'd save billions of dollars too, I bet.
- kiba 16y ago
  If people believed copying is stealing, then they believe it is in their moral right to shut down filesharing networks and all sort of things. There are lot of people here that support anti-piracy effort of some kind and they won't be easily persuaded that people can make a living without copyright.
  - nodata 16y ago
    taps a bullet point on his imaginary list * Due process [explanation why this exists goes here] Doesn't matter whether you're pro or anti-copyright. Due process, limits on power, innocent until guilty are all relevant here. So let's use them. You either apply these ideas consistently or you lose them to exceptions.
- cookiecaper 16y ago
  It's the perpetuation of a fraud. Even if we presume our people were committed to these ideas, which they aren't anymore, the commitment quickly erodes once you become the one with the power to "expedite" or skirt these protections. Until the character of all those involved in government is pure, government is going to attempt to make "special exceptions" (read: not really that special) and fear monger the whole way so that people stay off their backs. It is crucial to the preservation of our liberties that The People frequently reassess how well we are following these principles and that they exert their sovereign authority to ensure that they are followed by our representatives and administrators as closely as possible. Now, does our populace do this anymore? I don't think they do. I think they are mostly concerned with and distracted by social issues (which are important, but have become a huge distraction to all other forms of policy) and let everything else slide until Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann feign outrage to further political or commercial agenda. It's all a lost cause in my opinion. The People are corrupt and the Government is certainly corrupt. What can we do now? We just have to wait for the inevitable implosion.
jeromec 16y ago
I want to play devil's advocate here, and would love input from others as well, because if I'm right my thinking casts the govt. in a much less harsh light. ICANN was created to manage DNS and IP address space on behalf of the govt. It's a non-profit that operates independently under a board of directors, and it's mandate comes from a Memorandum of Understanding which set up a relationship between ICANN and the U.S. govt. However, it still appears that ICANN is under the authority of the U.S. govt., although it is formally a non-profit corporation in California. I mean it's under U.S. authority sort of in the same way that the Bush administration could press telecoms to illegally wiretap communications at Folsom St. in San Francisco and elsewhere. Now, that warrant-less wiretapping was blatantly unconstitutional, because legally protected privacy was breached. However, these domain seizures are different, because nobody is guaranteed the right to use domain names; it's more of a privilege like driving. People don't have the "right" to drive cars. That's a privilege granted by states, and subject to their regulations and laws. If a person applied for a license and stated they only wanted to drive so they could rob banks and get away faster, I'm guessing they could be legally denied the license, no court case needed. Well, this appears to be a similar issue. It would make these seizures look like less of an overreach by the DHS. The issues around DCMA are something different to address. I'm strictly talking about this domain seizure issue, and the claim of unconstitutional censorship. That may not be an accurate claim at all. It may be that we need to ensure ICANN is out of the jurisdiction of the U.S. govt.
- Andrew_Quentin 16y ago
  Everyone has the right to drive a car, to eat a cheesburger, to buy a computer, an ipod, to drive a plane and own one. We have the right to do anything and everything which is not prohibited by the law. On the other hand, the government can do only that which is allowed by the law. Thus, we do have a right to own a domain, a domain is private property, the government has no right to cease it unless the legislature has given them the right and if the legislature has given them the right, then whether this right applies in an individual case is up to the court to decide who has the job of interpreting the law and applying it to the facts of individual cases.
  - 16y ago
wyclif 16y ago
I'd like to see a list of those 70 domains.
- daeken 16y ago
  2009jerseys.com, 51607.com, amoyhy.com, b2corder.com, bishoe.com, borntrade.com, borntrade.net, boxedtvseries.com, boxset4less.com, boxsetseries.com, burberryoutletshop.com, cartoon77.com, cheapscarfshop.com, coachoutletfactory.com, dajaz1.com, discountscarvesonsale.com, dvdcollectionsale.com, dvdcollects.com, dvdorderonline.com, dvdprostore.com, dvdscollection.com, dvdsetcollection.com, dvdsetsonline.com, dvdsuperdeal.com, eluxury-outlet.com, getdvdset.com, gofactoryoutlet.com, golfstaring.com, golfwholesale18.com, handbag9.com, handbagcom.com, handbagspop.com, icqshoes.com, ipodnanouk.com, jersey-china.com, jerseyclubhouse.com, jordansbox.com, lifetimereplicas.com, louis-vuitton-outlet-store.com, lv-outlets.com, lv-outlets.net, lv-outletstore.com, massnike.com, merrytimberland.com, mycollects.com, mydreamwatches.com, mygolfwholesale.com, newstylerolex.com, nfljerseysupply.com, nibdvd.com, odvdo.com, oebags.com, onsmash.com, overbestmall.com, rapgodfathers.com, realtimberland.com, rmx4u.com, scarfonlineshop.com, scarfviponsale.com, shawls-store.com, silkscarf-shop.com, silkscarfonsale.com, skyergolf.com, sohob2b.com, sohob2c.com, storeofeast.com, stuff-trade.com, sunglasses-mall.com, sunogolf.com, tbl-sports.com, throwbackguy.com, tiesonsale.com, timberlandlike.com, topabuy.com, torrent-finder.com, usaburberryscarf.com, usaoutlets.net
  - SkyMarshal 16y ago
    Opportunity for a quick score - reregister as many of those as possible under unregistered foreign TLDs, then sell for a hefty markup when those companies come looking for a safer TLD to reregister their domain under.
    - AndyKelley 16y ago
      yuck.
    - RtodaAV 16y ago
      sad.
tptacek 16y ago
People are having a hard time understanding how this could be happening. Perhaps these people don't get out much. What's happening here is simple: the federal government is using Civil Asset Forfeiture for IP/copyright enforcement. Particularly when armed with a court order, the government has broad authority to seize property that can either be traced to the proceeds of a crime, or that can be shown to be used in furtherance of a crime. This comes up all - the - time in drug enforcement, where the police use it to seize vehicles used to run drugs. All that appears to be happening here is that the government is applying it to copyright enforcement. The Libertarian magazine Reason has been covering the increased use (and misuse) of civil asset forfeiture for years now. It ticked up during the Bush years, and has been validated multiple times during the Obama presidency. In particular, note that there are due process protections with strict statutory timelines attached to them for challenging civil seizures. One doubts many of these enterprises will avail themselves of those procedures; most would probably lose, and it's simpler just to host offshore. "Why, oh why, is DHS and ICE doing the RIAA's work for them?" Because it's part of their charter. The "C" in ICE stands for Customs. Customs deals with counterfeiting (it's an importation issue), and hosts a large IPR enforcement division. No, the RIAA has not wheedled its way into DHS and refocused homeland security on copyright enforcement. Civil asset forfeiture can get very sketchy. I wish there were more bright-line limitations on what the government can and can't do with it. The impression that I have is that in the majority of cases where it's applied, you generally want LEO's to have the power to seize what they're seizing. But every once in awhile, they pull some 60 year old guy over with the cash down payment he was going to make for his new pickup truck, declare him a drug dealer, and end up pocketing the cash because he can't find a lawyer. That's a miscarriage of justice. In light of it, I have a hard time feeling too sorry for people who lose their pirate music storefront sites. I like 'daeken (I work with him!), and I know and respect that he has a very different take on intellectual property than I do, but his take on this seems a bit breathless.
- daeken 16y ago
  > I like 'daeken (I work with him!), and I know and respect that he has a very different take on intellectual property than I do, but his take on this seems a bit breathless. Quite honestly, this was a post written in about 20 minutes simply due to being upset and wondering "when is my own domain going down?". I didn't figure it'd be hitting the top of HN and get this much attention, otherwise I probably would've made it considerably more coherent, and less emotional.
anigbrowl 16y ago
Lost in the fuss over this is the fact that ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) did in fact get a warrant for these and previous domain seizures. Of course, ICE brought this paranoia on themselves, since their scary graphic doesn't include copies of the warrants, details of which courts issued them, or information about the procedure they went through to get them. But the only person they have to notify is the registrant; and the standards for proof of service (of the warrant) in foreign domains is lower than that within the US. I'm not sure the owner of torrent-finder.com is necessarily an honest reporter - the court may not have provided him with any notice, though I find it hard to believe he's never ever received a complaint or warning of any kind that might tip him off to such an eventuality. Incidentally, considering that all his contact details are still available via goDaddy's whois, it's a bit depressing that none of the media outlets reporting this so breathlessly have spent the $1 or so it would cost to call him up for a quote. And we wonder why the investigative reporting business is in such a poor state.
- pyre 16y ago
  I think that anyone on the mainstream-media that read that post is scratching their heads wondering what a WHOIS record is.
ecuzzillo 16y ago
I've been here for a while, and I already went through my six-month noob HN-is-reddit phase. That being said, in what possible way is this within the HN guidelines?
- elbrodeur 16y ago
  Putting this here because you don't have an email address: - Upvoting an article is the group's way of saying, "This article has something interesting in it." - Bad articles, spam, linkbait or things that don't fit in the guidelines or don't follow common sense usually get flagged and filtered out. The post doesn't really seem to be outside of the guidelines. It may not meet your personal standard of quality, but the group likes it so it's on the front page. The best way to combat content that you think is spammy, irrelevant or wrong is to flag it.
  - ecuzzillo 16y ago
    I did flag it. I'm aware of the idea that people are supposed to upvote things that have something interesting in them. However, lately, it has been remarked elsewhere by people who are not me that politics have crept into the discussion well beyond the threshold of intellectual curiosity, and this was to me a flagrant example of something that in no way piqued anyone's intellectual curiosity, but instead triggered political feelings. Things that are there for the purpose of intellectual intrigue do not have rallying cries for redistribution in bold as their first sentence, for example. Also, I've observed the upvote vs. flag mechanism working for several years now. I agree that it does work in general. I posted this because I believe it is somewhat breaking down lately, in the form of political rallying cries reaching the front page.
    - mquander 16y ago
      I agree with you about this post. But the only thing to do is flag it and move on. Complaining in the post is rarely going to lead to anything productive at all, so you may as well not do it. Keep the thread clean for people who do want to talk about this.
    - 16y ago
joelhaus 16y ago
Did WIPO[1]/UDRP[2] play a role in this? Assuming not, I'm curious, in your opinion, does the procedure WIPO uses to confiscate domain names provide sufficient due process? [1] http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/index.html http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/index.html [2] http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp.htm http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp.htm P.S. It would also be nice if you could cite where you learned about this story. [Update]: saw the big section labeled "REFERENCES", forget my P.S.
bconway 16y ago
FYI- This is an elaborate hoax. http://grandgood.com/2010/11/27/domain-name-seizures-of-popular-rap-file-sharing-sites-potentially-an-elaborate-hoax/ http://grandgood.com/2010/11/27/domain-name-seizures-of-popu...

191 points by daeken 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

tomjen3 16y ago

Does anybody know why nobody has sued over this yet? it has to be blatantly unconstitutional.

Vivtek 16y ago
Because it happened yesterday?
elbrodeur 16y ago
I'm not an expert but it seems to be legal and even constitutional. It's offensive, but if you mad-libbed the story, I'm betting it would seem less offensive. The US Government siezed __number__ of __noun plural__ because of suspected __illegal verb__. I was upset when I read the headlines as well. Mostly because of what I inferred -- not because of what happened. My only worry is that one sad effect of this precedent might be people having their domains taken from them because a small number of users use the service for illegal activity. EDIT: There's another post on the front page right now which says what I wanted to say much more eloquently: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1946154 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1946154

cool-RR 16y ago

Final sentence: We cannot take this sitting down. This must not be allowed to stand. So... We let it sit down, and we have to stand?

lukeschlather 16y ago
We stand up and knock it on its ass. This is a blatant violation of due process.

NginUS 16y ago

Still beats syphilis experiments or sarin/VX testing.

ericb 16y ago
But maybe not the evils the government commits tomorrow which we won't hear about because of censorship.
- J3L2404 16y ago
  The arc of history is long but it bends toward freedom.
  - NginUS 16y ago
    I agree completely. What I can't be sure of is whether these actions are indeed a step in the wrong direction- at least for the time being. Just maybe it's not what it seems. When Bernanke starts recklessly printing money the way he did recently- that seems like a panic-driven survivalist effort to me, and I begin wondering if this isn't more of the same. China's got us by the balls alright. I'm sure there's some twisting going on that only the government higher-ups can see, to warrant these reactions of late.
    - ericb 16y ago
      > China's got us by the balls alright. Not sure about that. I think debtors have more power than creditors. After you have a client refuse to pay you, you start to see creditor/debtor power balance in a different light.
      - robryan 16y ago
        In the short term possibly, but in the long term refusing to pay a debt such as that would make it impossible for America to source credit.
        16y ago

nodata 16y ago

I find situations like this extremely difficult to understand. I really don't get it at all. Either we have a system where you are innocent until proven guilty, have a right to a fair trial, good evidence has to exist, you have a right to privacy, a right to trial by jury, no corruption, no torture, etc. etc. or we don't. That's it. We are continually chasing our tail re-asking questions about when each of these things is appropriate and when they are not. So here's my solution: we make a list. Each time people ask these same questions again and again and again, we point at the list. It'd save billions of dollars too, I bet.

kiba 16y ago
If people believed copying is stealing, then they believe it is in their moral right to shut down filesharing networks and all sort of things. There are lot of people here that support anti-piracy effort of some kind and they won't be easily persuaded that people can make a living without copyright.
- nodata 16y ago
  taps a bullet point on his imaginary list * Due process [explanation why this exists goes here] Doesn't matter whether you're pro or anti-copyright. Due process, limits on power, innocent until guilty are all relevant here. So let's use them. You either apply these ideas consistently or you lose them to exceptions.
cookiecaper 16y ago
It's the perpetuation of a fraud. Even if we presume our people were committed to these ideas, which they aren't anymore, the commitment quickly erodes once you become the one with the power to "expedite" or skirt these protections. Until the character of all those involved in government is pure, government is going to attempt to make "special exceptions" (read: not really that special) and fear monger the whole way so that people stay off their backs. It is crucial to the preservation of our liberties that The People frequently reassess how well we are following these principles and that they exert their sovereign authority to ensure that they are followed by our representatives and administrators as closely as possible. Now, does our populace do this anymore? I don't think they do. I think they are mostly concerned with and distracted by social issues (which are important, but have become a huge distraction to all other forms of policy) and let everything else slide until Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann feign outrage to further political or commercial agenda. It's all a lost cause in my opinion. The People are corrupt and the Government is certainly corrupt. What can we do now? We just have to wait for the inevitable implosion.

jeromec 16y ago

I want to play devil's advocate here, and would love input from others as well, because if I'm right my thinking casts the govt. in a much less harsh light. ICANN was created to manage DNS and IP address space on behalf of the govt. It's a non-profit that operates independently under a board of directors, and it's mandate comes from a Memorandum of Understanding which set up a relationship between ICANN and the U.S. govt. However, it still appears that ICANN is under the authority of the U.S. govt., although it is formally a non-profit corporation in California. I mean it's under U.S. authority sort of in the same way that the Bush administration could press telecoms to illegally wiretap communications at Folsom St. in San Francisco and elsewhere. Now, that warrant-less wiretapping was blatantly unconstitutional, because legally protected privacy was breached. However, these domain seizures are different, because nobody is guaranteed the right to use domain names; it's more of a privilege like driving. People don't have the "right" to drive cars. That's a privilege granted by states, and subject to their regulations and laws. If a person applied for a license and stated they only wanted to drive so they could rob banks and get away faster, I'm guessing they could be legally denied the license, no court case needed. Well, this appears to be a similar issue. It would make these seizures look like less of an overreach by the DHS. The issues around DCMA are something different to address. I'm strictly talking about this domain seizure issue, and the claim of unconstitutional censorship. That may not be an accurate claim at all. It may be that we need to ensure ICANN is out of the jurisdiction of the U.S. govt.

Andrew_Quentin 16y ago
Everyone has the right to drive a car, to eat a cheesburger, to buy a computer, an ipod, to drive a plane and own one. We have the right to do anything and everything which is not prohibited by the law. On the other hand, the government can do only that which is allowed by the law. Thus, we do have a right to own a domain, a domain is private property, the government has no right to cease it unless the legislature has given them the right and if the legislature has given them the right, then whether this right applies in an individual case is up to the court to decide who has the job of interpreting the law and applying it to the facts of individual cases.
- 16y ago

wyclif 16y ago

I'd like to see a list of those 70 domains.

daeken 16y ago
2009jerseys.com, 51607.com, amoyhy.com, b2corder.com, bishoe.com, borntrade.com, borntrade.net, boxedtvseries.com, boxset4less.com, boxsetseries.com, burberryoutletshop.com, cartoon77.com, cheapscarfshop.com, coachoutletfactory.com, dajaz1.com, discountscarvesonsale.com, dvdcollectionsale.com, dvdcollects.com, dvdorderonline.com, dvdprostore.com, dvdscollection.com, dvdsetcollection.com, dvdsetsonline.com, dvdsuperdeal.com, eluxury-outlet.com, getdvdset.com, gofactoryoutlet.com, golfstaring.com, golfwholesale18.com, handbag9.com, handbagcom.com, handbagspop.com, icqshoes.com, ipodnanouk.com, jersey-china.com, jerseyclubhouse.com, jordansbox.com, lifetimereplicas.com, louis-vuitton-outlet-store.com, lv-outlets.com, lv-outlets.net, lv-outletstore.com, massnike.com, merrytimberland.com, mycollects.com, mydreamwatches.com, mygolfwholesale.com, newstylerolex.com, nfljerseysupply.com, nibdvd.com, odvdo.com, oebags.com, onsmash.com, overbestmall.com, rapgodfathers.com, realtimberland.com, rmx4u.com, scarfonlineshop.com, scarfviponsale.com, shawls-store.com, silkscarf-shop.com, silkscarfonsale.com, skyergolf.com, sohob2b.com, sohob2c.com, storeofeast.com, stuff-trade.com, sunglasses-mall.com, sunogolf.com, tbl-sports.com, throwbackguy.com, tiesonsale.com, timberlandlike.com, topabuy.com, torrent-finder.com, usaburberryscarf.com, usaoutlets.net
- SkyMarshal 16y ago
  Opportunity for a quick score - reregister as many of those as possible under unregistered foreign TLDs, then sell for a hefty markup when those companies come looking for a safer TLD to reregister their domain under.
  - AndyKelley 16y ago
    yuck.
  - RtodaAV 16y ago
    sad.

tptacek 16y ago

People are having a hard time understanding how this could be happening. Perhaps these people don't get out much. What's happening here is simple: the federal government is using Civil Asset Forfeiture for IP/copyright enforcement. Particularly when armed with a court order, the government has broad authority to seize property that can either be traced to the proceeds of a crime, or that can be shown to be used in furtherance of a crime. This comes up all - the - time in drug enforcement, where the police use it to seize vehicles used to run drugs. All that appears to be happening here is that the government is applying it to copyright enforcement. The Libertarian magazine Reason has been covering the increased use (and misuse) of civil asset forfeiture for years now. It ticked up during the Bush years, and has been validated multiple times during the Obama presidency. In particular, note that there are due process protections with strict statutory timelines attached to them for challenging civil seizures. One doubts many of these enterprises will avail themselves of those procedures; most would probably lose, and it's simpler just to host offshore. "Why, oh why, is DHS and ICE doing the RIAA's work for them?" Because it's part of their charter. The "C" in ICE stands for Customs. Customs deals with counterfeiting (it's an importation issue), and hosts a large IPR enforcement division. No, the RIAA has not wheedled its way into DHS and refocused homeland security on copyright enforcement. Civil asset forfeiture can get very sketchy. I wish there were more bright-line limitations on what the government can and can't do with it. The impression that I have is that in the majority of cases where it's applied, you generally want LEO's to have the power to seize what they're seizing. But every once in awhile, they pull some 60 year old guy over with the cash down payment he was going to make for his new pickup truck, declare him a drug dealer, and end up pocketing the cash because he can't find a lawyer. That's a miscarriage of justice. In light of it, I have a hard time feeling too sorry for people who lose their pirate music storefront sites. I like 'daeken (I work with him!), and I know and respect that he has a very different take on intellectual property than I do, but his take on this seems a bit breathless.

daeken 16y ago
> I like 'daeken (I work with him!), and I know and respect that he has a very different take on intellectual property than I do, but his take on this seems a bit breathless. Quite honestly, this was a post written in about 20 minutes simply due to being upset and wondering "when is my own domain going down?". I didn't figure it'd be hitting the top of HN and get this much attention, otherwise I probably would've made it considerably more coherent, and less emotional.

anigbrowl 16y ago

Lost in the fuss over this is the fact that ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) did in fact get a warrant for these and previous domain seizures. Of course, ICE brought this paranoia on themselves, since their scary graphic doesn't include copies of the warrants, details of which courts issued them, or information about the procedure they went through to get them. But the only person they have to notify is the registrant; and the standards for proof of service (of the warrant) in foreign domains is lower than that within the US. I'm not sure the owner of torrent-finder.com is necessarily an honest reporter - the court may not have provided him with any notice, though I find it hard to believe he's never ever received a complaint or warning of any kind that might tip him off to such an eventuality. Incidentally, considering that all his contact details are still available via goDaddy's whois, it's a bit depressing that none of the media outlets reporting this so breathlessly have spent the $1 or so it would cost to call him up for a quote. And we wonder why the investigative reporting business is in such a poor state.

pyre 16y ago
I think that anyone on the mainstream-media that read that post is scratching their heads wondering what a WHOIS record is.

ecuzzillo 16y ago

I've been here for a while, and I already went through my six-month noob HN-is-reddit phase. That being said, in what possible way is this within the HN guidelines?

elbrodeur 16y ago
Putting this here because you don't have an email address: - Upvoting an article is the group's way of saying, "This article has something interesting in it." - Bad articles, spam, linkbait or things that don't fit in the guidelines or don't follow common sense usually get flagged and filtered out. The post doesn't really seem to be outside of the guidelines. It may not meet your personal standard of quality, but the group likes it so it's on the front page. The best way to combat content that you think is spammy, irrelevant or wrong is to flag it.
- ecuzzillo 16y ago
  I did flag it. I'm aware of the idea that people are supposed to upvote things that have something interesting in them. However, lately, it has been remarked elsewhere by people who are not me that politics have crept into the discussion well beyond the threshold of intellectual curiosity, and this was to me a flagrant example of something that in no way piqued anyone's intellectual curiosity, but instead triggered political feelings. Things that are there for the purpose of intellectual intrigue do not have rallying cries for redistribution in bold as their first sentence, for example. Also, I've observed the upvote vs. flag mechanism working for several years now. I agree that it does work in general. I posted this because I believe it is somewhat breaking down lately, in the form of political rallying cries reaching the front page.
  - mquander 16y ago
    I agree with you about this post. But the only thing to do is flag it and move on. Complaining in the post is rarely going to lead to anything productive at all, so you may as well not do it. Keep the thread clean for people who do want to talk about this.
  - 16y ago

joelhaus 16y ago

Did WIPO[1]/UDRP[2] play a role in this? Assuming not, I'm curious, in your opinion, does the procedure WIPO uses to confiscate domain names provide sufficient due process? [1] http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/index.html http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/index.html [2] http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp.htm http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp.htm P.S. It would also be nice if you could cite where you learned about this story. [Update]: saw the big section labeled "REFERENCES", forget my P.S.

bconway 16y ago

FYI- This is an elaborate hoax. http://grandgood.com/2010/11/27/domain-name-seizures-of-popular-rap-file-sharing-sites-potentially-an-elaborate-hoax/ http://grandgood.com/2010/11/27/domain-name-seizures-of-popu...