Yesterday Conroy was asked some pointed (and obviously difficult) questions in Parliament about the Internet filter. He responded with the usual rubbish and also tried to lay some smack down on the EFA and Reporters Without Borders. Unfortunately for him he made a couple of mistakes, including basically stating that he'd never branded critics of his filtering plan as child porn advocates, to which the EFA has responded with two clear examples of where he has done exactly that.

Senator Conroy minced no words in singling out EFA and criticising our campaign against his policy, saying that “Electronic Frontiers Australia have run one of the most disgraceful misinformation campaigns and have misled Australians.” We are aggressive in educating the public on the drawbacks of this and other policies that threaten our online freedoms, but take great pains to provide factual information and analysis to the Australian public. If we have erred in any particular instance, then we welcome a correction. That said, we have carefully considered the legalities and technical issues surrounding the policy and unreservedly stand by our assessment. It will achieve nothing for parents and police, it will cost enormous amounts of money, and presents a real threat to our freedom of speech. For the Government’s part, we have heard many frightening statements about internet bestiality, but are still awaiting a solid defence of this policy that references any evidence, study, or reputable expert that demonstrates this filter will help Australian children. We challenge the Minister to produce such evidence.

The full post is up now on the EFA website:

http://www.efa.org.au/2010/03/16/efa-responds-to-senator-conroy/

I would be pretty embarrassed to be this guy, or to be affiliated with him in any way. Props to Senator Boyce for asking these important questions.

hopefully he dies soon

I recall Conroy getting pissy when Google said they wouldn't filter RC content on youtube. His response was they were happy in filter in china until they became upset because "china hacked their source code" - I think this was after the Chinese government (supposedly) did some man in the middle attacks to steal some gmail passwords, then swept the inboxes of a whole bunch at once. At that point I realised he's not just pushing this to win the family first vote or any such, he really has no fking idea what he's talking about.

Senator Boyce's offices are just around the corner from where I work. Think I'll be dropping in a bottle of wine at lunch time to show my appreciation.

^ pretty sure they aren't allowed to accept gifts, so his secretary will just be drinking your wine
my mrs brings home wine and gifts from her boss (MD) all the time

+1 EFA
-11ty billion Conroy

f*** I hate him, really
He's very good at playing politics though, I have to give him that - pity he plays for the opposite team
hopefully his reign will come to a swift end in 2011 before this stupid filter gets any legs

Even if they were allowed to accept gifts, I'd have thought politicians would have a general policy not to ingest food or drink from random strangers just in case the gifter has more sinister motives.

Good points from both of you. TBH, I'm happy for HER secretary to drink the wine in her stead.

As for not accepting food/drink from random strangers, there's a bit of a difference between a sealed bottle of wine and a home-baked cake or batch of cookies :)

tru dat ho

There's still the old syringe through the cork trick. No-one would expect it, it's brilliant!

Edit:
Disclaimer - in no way am I suggesting that anyone working around the corner from Senator Conroy's office follow this advice.

They can, they just have to declare any gifts with a value over $50.
Anyone in the public service (QR/State or Local Gov/Main Roads etc) has to.

I've had a couple of cartons given to me by various private construction crew/firms which i've had to declare, depending on the brand.

you're scarier than a biker gang dazhel

its crazy with all the information available to them, that they are going ahead with this

I've had a couple of cartons given to me by various private construction crew/firms which i've had to declare, depending on the brand.

I wouldn't own up to drinking s*** brands of alcohol either.

Great, so I'll buy her a $49 bottle of red. She doesn't have to declare it and either her or her secretary get a nice bottle of wine to drink because of the Senator's clear thinking and stance on this issue.

Sounds good to me.

Also, who the f*** uses corks anymore? :S

you're scarier than a biker gang dazhel

http://knowyourmeme.com/i/681/original/what-you-did-there-i-see-it.thumbnail.jpg

Boyce gets wine, conroy just whines

its crazy with all the information available to them, that they are going ahead with this

Its how big business rolls matey. Once you formulate a plan, no matter how stupid you must see it through rather than admit you're wrong.

Doing so would create a chink in the armour.

I would be pretty embarrassed to be this guy, or to be affiliated with him in any way.

Imagine being his wife...having to look people in the eye while you're going shopping...wonder if she lives on Valium.

trog: how come you seem to be against this internet censorship, yet still feel the need to lock death pun threads? Death pun threads are funny (imo, and by the amount of posts they get I am sure other people agree) and don't hurt anybody.

Just for the record I am not playing the freedom of speech card on you. I understand this is a moderated forum and you nuke and lock what you see fit. Just wondering what your answer will be.

last edited by fpot at 17:50:58 16/Mar/10

because until we can have total fun on the internet, we are going to get no fun on the internet. trog's just sticking to the cause.

I support the locking of 'death pun' threads.

One is the government trying to stop you from doing something.

The other is someone on a personal site not wanting you to do something to them.

This news makes me happy.

trog: how come you seem to be against this internet censorship, yet still feel the need to lock death pun threads? Death pun threads are funny (imo, and by the amount of posts they get I am sure other people agree) and don't hurt anybody.

Just for the record I am not playing the freedom of speech card on you. I understand this is a moderated forum and you nuke and lock what you see fit. Just wondering what your answer will be.last edited by fpot at 17:50:58 16/Mar/10

I just think laughing at the death of actual human beings isn't really appropriate and it's not something I want to encourage people do. When I think about what it's like when people I know have died, I can imagine the last thing I would want to see is someone having a good time at their expense.

I obviously believe that people should have the RIGHT to do that. I'm sure Conroy would have a different perspective, but if you want to start a blog that is all about making hiliarous puns whenever someone dies then I fully support your RIGHT to do that. But I think it is a douche thing to do.

What about the hilarious puns when conroy dies?

Email in support of Sen Boyce sent

Not as good as a bottle of wine....but i'm cheap

What about the hilarious puns when conroy dies?

Like if he for example if his heart lost sync?
or perhaps he was added to the great blacklist in the sky
maybe his classification is refused

What about the hilarious puns when conroy dies?

Like if he for example if his heart lost sync? or perhaps he was added to the great blacklist in the sky maybe his classification is refused

ha! all gold.

or maybe his connection timed out

Maybe they could rename and 403 Forbidden error to CONROY f***S WITH YOUR SHIZ AND COSTS $43M error

Whats the difference between a little bit of Censorship and a lot of Censorship ?

One is implement on a private site, with absolutly no control what you can/cant do outside it.
The other is administered by a government body on everyone, which controls what you are allowed to do, everywhere in your country.

Is that really hard to understand?

No, it isn't hard to understand.

I agree with locking threads that are in bad taste...

I don't agree with most of the nukes / locks that are done here.

There has been (anecdotally) more locks and nukes lately.

Maybe there's a pie chart in the making.

I agree with locking threads that are in bad taste... I don't agree with most of the nukes / locks that are done here.

I don't know. They can have a tendancy to clog the forum with junk. But some can be pretty funny...

Having said that, I think they should nuke every second revival of topics you guys always discuss.

Who would have thought that people's opinions on religion/evolution/usa/krudd hasn't changed since it was last brought up two weeks before!

I agree with locking threads that are in bad taste

I think the locking is somewhat a response to what you could call customer demand..

Some people have an irrational fear of discussing death.
If they laugh at death something will happen to them.
Thats called Superstition.

I joined this forum with the understanding that trog can ban whatever he sees fit (and happen to agree with him on this ban). I never agreed to the classification board attempting to sloppily control my entire web experience, especially given that I disagree with the banning of essentially any of the legal material I know of on the RC list, which makes it very hard to respect whoever these faceless and I suspect useless public servants are.

Some people have an irrational fear of discussing death.

Trog explained his reasons and they were not that.

Yeah, I don't agree with locking threads that are only 'bad taste'.

If it's "customer demand", skythra, it would take two seconds to implement a 'request lock' button next to the reply button, and then you could really do it via customer demand.

Plus, it's the QGLs, I don't think people are easily offended in this part of the world from what I've seen.

I think apply the rules. You write them - if they don't fit, modify them and then apply them.

I get locking threads, but I don't understand why they get removed, especially if it's because of something as trivial as a typo in the thread title. Unless the thread is full of people saying really horrible things, or people are posting s*** like tubgirl and goatse, why do they need to be removed? Can't they just be locked? What's the harm in letting people still read the thread? That's censorship on Trog's behalf.

I agree with locking threads that are in bad taste...

I don't agree with most of the nukes / locks that are done here.

woefully off topic, but examples? compared to the volume of new threads and new posts, you realise practically nothing is locked or nuked, right?

Before you answer, try to think objectively and see if you're just thinking about one or two times where one of your posts was nuked and you're mentally just stuck on that as your recollection of how crazy we are for nuking

edit: DB search tells me that of your 7151 posts, 35 have been nuked

this lock is my recent favourite : http://www.ausgamers.com/forums/general/thread.php/2863043

random poster : waa repost
trog: new article, new info, worthy thread
Dan: locked

Dan is a loose cannon.

I get locking threads, but I don't understand why they get removed, especially if it's because of something as trivial as a typo in the thread title. Unless the thread is full of people saying really horrible things, or people are posting s*** like tubgirl and goatse, why do they need to be removed? Can't they just be locked? What's the harm in letting people still read the thread? That's censorship on Trog's behalf.

when people use censorship when discussing things like this that are utterly trivial, then you cheapen the meaning of the word 'censorship' and make people less inclined to be aware of what REAL censorship is - ie, what the government is trying to do to you.

I honestly would rather you call me a stupid nazi f***wit than use the word censorship here.

There's no real reason they're removed that stands out. They're mostly just removed to get them the f*** out of the way. They're really not that interesting that I would want you wasting your time reading them.

The government wants to remove stuff it finds offensive.
Jokes about death is something you find offensive.

We all use QGL based on the rules of the Forum but removing material You dont approve of is Censorship. Its not illegal to make a joke about someones death.
Im sure there are many other reasons for removing threads but I just wanted to focus on this point.

SOMEONE NEEDS TO PUT A LEASH ON THAT BADBOY

I think you're missing the whole "Private Site, Private Choice" and "Public arena, Government enforcement" comparison Faceman.

I get locking threads, but I don't understand why they get removed, especially if it's because of something as trivial as a typo in the thread title. Unless the thread is full of people saying really horrible things, or people are posting s*** like tubgirl and goatse, why do they need to be removed? Can't they just be locked? What's the harm in letting people still read the thread? That's censorship on Trog's behalf.

When I've done it, it's been because of the way the moderation system is currently set up.

At the moment, if you *NUKE* the first post in a thread, it "removes" the thread in the forum listing. with the nuke reason next to it. It's something that needs to be reworked and will hopefully get a look in when the devs get around to enhancing the forum's moderation system.

People are looking in to enhancing the way you can oppress us already!?!? GOOD LORD.

I don't think you're a stupid nazi f***wit Trog.

EDIT: 800 posts! I'm loving the insightful comment that I hit this milestone with...

Yeah, I don't agree with locking threads that are only 'bad taste'.

I think so too. Those death threads that keep getting locked probably started because of Austin Powers, you know when someone dies and they stand around making jokes? Well I suppose that's originally from Bond. The jokes don't work unless the person is dead.

Now I wanna know who the trog abused.

Can you be a Nazi without being a f***wit or stupid?

Yeah, I don't agree with locking threads that are only 'bad taste'.

I think so too. Those death threads that keep getting locked probably started because of Austin Powers, you know when someone dies and they stand around making jokes? Well I suppose that's originally from Bond. The jokes don't work unless the person is dead.

you can make jokes based on almost anything. unfortunately most of them are usually at someones expense, and inevitably someone gets insulted.

only difference here is the person who thought it was in bad taste had the power to change it :)

Don't forget either that forum owners/mods are constantly getting s*** for things posted on their sites, being told they are responsible. Such as the government getting in a huff and writing facebook not long ago over vandalism on a tribute page. There's also the problem of advertisers that might decide to distance themselves.

The government however has no stake in what they are blocking, and much of it would be foreign content so they are not doing it for Australia's image.

There has been (anecdotally) more locks and nukes lately.

Maybe there's a pie chart in the making.

Not a bad idea!

FWIW people have /always/, on every forum I've moderated or visited or whatever, thought "omg now is the WORST time for nazi admins, it was so much better back in day X". I assume this is just the natural human tendency to remember the good old days and is an interesting psychological problem worthy of further investigation by BillyH.

I've always pretty much ignored it but now I will use the powar of DATA to see what is going on. Here is a monthly summary of nukes over the last ~4 years:

http://trog.qgl.org/up/nuked-posts.jpg

Also FWIW I think you guys are taking the "mad with power" stuff way out of context here. Most of the stuff that gets locked or deleted is so utterly boring, trivial, or obviously inappropriate. It's really, really not interesting stuff and I like to think that by removing it we're helping filter the Internet to make the overall quality rise.

Does that include Spams ?
Can you overlay Co2 onto that chart ?

Definetly see a trend back up since about 06, but its meaningless without total post volume for context!

I assume this is just the natural human tendency to remember the good old days and is an interesting psychological problem

I recently started pining for my student days with loads of free time, but then I remembered I had to stickytape the same pair of shoes together for 4 years and well yeah now I'm realising the suck has been consistently high forever. :P

Over december it went down... less moderation over the xmas break? go on holidays trog!

EDIT: i'm loving how this derail hasn't been nuked/moderated or put into a new thread.

2xEDIT: OVER 800 POSTS! Woo!

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/2951/53592891.png

yea, def nukes per posts needs to be the y axis

u ain't foolin me nazi

Definetly see a trend back up since about 06, but its meaningless without total post volume for context!

http://trog.qgl.org/up/nuked-posts-total.jpg (the total post count is reduced in scale cuz I'm too newb at Excel to figure out how to make the graph axis have different scales, otherwise the total post count is just massive, but it shows the overall flow accurately)

Just use nukes divided by posts to generate a QGL Nuke Index?

I assume this is just the natural human tendency to remember the good old days and is an interesting psychological problem

Yeah, this is purely people's tendency to forget bad things. I believe it's called 'the grass is always greener'.

I was only having a dig at Trog...

I just don't like Dan.

I assume this is just the natural human tendency to remember the good old days and is an interesting psychological problem

Yeah, this is purely people's tendency to forget bad things. I believe it's called 'the grass is always greener'.

maybe it's called optimism ?

I assume this is just the natural human tendency to remember the good old days and is an interesting psychological problem

Yeah, this is purely people's tendency to forget bad things. I believe it's called 'the grass is always greener'.

maybe it's called optimism ?

I would've said pessimism if anything. Surely optimism would be people thinking the current day is better than the 'old days'?

'Optimism' is temporally loaded. You can't be optimistic about the past (or the present for that matter), it only makes sense when considering potential futures.

The term you are looking for is nostalgia.

italics

are awesome

I prefer emphasis, and let the user client decide what to do

I let my Capitals do the Work for Me.

i stand corrected. apologies all around.

/thread