×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

State Lawmaker Wants To Ban Anonymous Posting Online

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the didn't-know-kentucky-was-so-powerful dept.

Government 471

bfwebster writes "According to a local news article from last week, Kentucky state lawmaker Tim Couch wants to ban anonymous posting on the internet in order to 'cut down on online bullying', which he says has been 'a particular problem in eastern Kentucky.' His bill would require posters to register with their real names and e-mail addresses under threat of fines. Looks like another battle in the right for anonymous free speech."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

471 comments

how about passing laws that have some... (4, Insightful)

going_the_2Rpi_way (818355) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703820)

hope in hell of being enforced, or are at the very least enforceable.

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (5, Insightful)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703950)

Is that seriously the main flaw you find with this law? Would you rather they come up with a free-speech-restricting law that's more enforcable?

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (1)

going_the_2Rpi_way (818355) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704082)

If we're going to debate fictional, unenforceable laws, I'd prefer to debate the ones Asimov proposed. This is no more free-speech-restricting than my picking up a stone and calling it a free-speech restricting rock. But I know what you're going to say -- "Lisa, I want to buy your rock..."

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (5, Insightful)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704092)

No, that isn't anyone's main flaw. But it should be mandatory that these lawmakers should have at least enough of a clue to determine if what they are proposing is even possible before they start drafting legislation.

This makes as much sense as drafting a law making it illegal for it to rain on Thursdays. The frightening part is that the bozo drafting the law doesn't see why it's a problem.

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704314)

I imagine he mentions it because it's the most practical concern that the state lawmakers would pay attention to. Free speech rights have been restricted by the supreme court before, and this law would easily fit the constitutional test if they only forced minors to register (I seem to remember this being the case in Ender's Game, but I'm not sure). This would also ring more true with the populace as a whole.

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (5, Interesting)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704360)

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

-Ayn Rand

...

Is that seriously the main flaw you find with this law?

Brian Gordon

Yes.

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (5, Insightful)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704486)

Among the larger financial supporters of the coalition against drugs in america

Tobacco Companies
Alcohol Companies
Private Prison Companies

We incarcerate more people than china.
We strip away a very particular group of people's voting rights through selective drug law enforcement.
We have double the drug use of Amsterdam (where drug use is legal).

Yes (4, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704544)

A law that isn't enforceable is totally pointless. If it is a legit, enforceable law, then you can debate if it is a good one or not, but an unenforceable law is just the height of stupidity and a waste of time. I mean we could pass a law saying the sun needs to be cooler, but there is fuck all we can do to make that happen, so it would be a waste of time.

I'm not saying I agree with laws that are restricting speech, but at least if it was a law that was enforceable then there could be a point to it. You could debate if it was a good idea or not, if the tradeoff was worth it. Here, it is just a fucking waste of time since regardless of any merits, it just won't work.

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703992)

"....hope in hell of being enforced, or are at the very least enforceable."

But, it would be feasible!! I think in his bill, he requires that each of us on the interweb be assigned a personal, and uniquely identifiable "tube", from which we all have to post and email from.

No sharing or using anonymous tubes, if you get caught....fine and jail time.

See? It is simple as that!!

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (4, Informative)

GarryFre (886347) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704112)

We all knew the names of bullies at school. It didn't stop them. Take one look at Uselessnet and you see bullying from folks who give out their names, emails and all kind of stuff. Stupid people (bullies) stand by their stupidity.

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (2, Insightful)

trolltalk.com (1108067) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704152)

His bill would require posters to register with their real names and e-mail addresses under threat of fines

All they have to do is import the technology from China - the "other place" that wants to do the same thing ...

Please remind me again what's the difference between the "land of the free" and "dirty commie bastards".

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (5, Funny)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704202)

"Represntative [sic] Couch says enforcing this bill if it became law would be a challenge."

Couch went on to acknowledge that Space is big, that there are quite a few people in China, that antidisestablishmentarianism is a long word, and that John McCain is not very young.

Re:how about passing laws that have some... (1)

Jikrschbaum (920529) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704430)

Or how about they quit wasting our tax dollars "passing" these laws that are going to be ruled unconstitutional in the first place just so they can look good in their upcoming re-election bid? I got a suggestion, next time one of these yahoo legislative buffoons gets behind a bill that subsequently gets challenged in the courts and ruled unconstitutional, how about they pay the court costs and lawyer fees out of there own damn coffers.

What we should ban... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703826)

We should ban stupid politicians. Unfortunately, how do you ban ignorance?

Re:What we should ban... (3, Funny)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703938)

>We should ban stupid politicians. Unfortunately, how do you ban ignorance?

In this case, you have other, better educated politicians talk to the stupid ones
about things like equal protection, or chilling effects on free speech. You know,
the stuff the ignorance of which has ended the careers of so many other stupid politicians.

On the other hand, the opinion of a single lawmaker in a state assembly has about the same merit as that of one slashdot poster. They say stupid stuff all the time and nothing comes of it.

*OR* (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703832)

...they could just install a keystroke logger on both the computers in Eastern Kentucky.

How (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703836)

Obvious comment: How do you fine someone you can't identify?

Re:How (2, Informative)

cyclopropene (777291) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704158)

Obvious comment: How do you fine someone you can't identify?
By reading the article?

If the bill becomes law, the website operator would have to pay if someone was allowed to post anonymously on their site. The fine would be five-hundred dollars for a first offense and one-thousand dollars for each offense after that.

Ahh, the smell of burning karma (5, Funny)

illegibledotorg (1123239) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703840)

Tim Couch, wants to ban anonymous posting on the internet in order to 'cut down on online bullying', which he says has been 'a particular problem in eastern Kentucky.'
Evidently, both computer owners in Eastern Kentucky are upset at each other.

Re:Ahh, the smell of burning karma (1, Funny)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703918)

two brothers found out each other were part of the love triangle with mom

correction . . . (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703966)

Only ONE of them is a computer owner...the other eastern Kentuckian is stealing Internet for free from the 1st guy via his wireless router, which he doesn't know how to use.

OH LOL, and I just posted this message anonymously OOPS

Re:Ahh, the smell of burning karma (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704532)

That was awesome!

lol...

be wary /.ers of kentucky (1)

OrochimaruVoldemort (1248060) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703844)

now you may not be an anonymous coward for much longer

Re:be wary /.ers of kentucky (1)

psychodelicacy (1170611) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704552)

It's not just that, though, is it? Under this bill you'd have to give /. your contact details, and you'd only be able to post using your real name. So usernames are also out. Posting using anything other than the name on your official documents gets the website a big fine.

Fucking no-nothing inbred hicks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703858)

Christ I hope this bullshit isn't the wave of the future. *sigh* Why is it that the christian assholes have to ruin every last fucking thing?

Re:Fscking no-nothing inbred hicks (2, Insightful)

graveyhead (210996) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704094)

Ooh, flamebait, fun! It's Monday after the clock change, so I'll entertain myself while my brain awakes.

First of all, you spelled "know" incorrectly.

Secondly, where did anyone mention religion? I must've missed that.

Thirdly, do you have to use profanity? I mean I just sent Rep. ClueStick an email on his form, and was perfectly polite in telling him where to stick his bill :-P

Well, Of Course! (1)

Wandering Wombat (531833) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703860)

Because every message board on the internet is legally subject to whatever state laws this guy can push through... I know /b/ is!

maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703864)

They should ban retards from Kentucky....

nah, that would be half the state at least

Anonymously post your comments to Rep. Couch (5, Interesting)

HohlerMann (410170) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703868)

Send your anonymous comments to Rep. Tim Couch using his official form at http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Mailform/H090.htm [ky.gov]

Re:Anonymously post your comments to Rep. Couch (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704382)

Do I get bonus points if I sign them "Publius"?

Re:Anonymously post your comments to Rep. Couch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704428)

Dear Rep Couch:

You're a douchebag and your momma dresses you funny.

Love, Publius [wikipedia.org]

Please... (5, Insightful)

SameBrian (945591) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703882)

If you're getting bullied online by anonymous people and taking it seriously, then your parents messed up big time somewhere along the way. I grew up with the internet, and was constantly harassed by anonymous idiots. I just knew better than to take them seriously, since they are SOME IDIOT ON THE INTERNET!!!!!1!!1!!!!lim(x->0)[sin(x)/x]. I'm getting really sick and tired of parents trying to use the legal system to protect their kids. The idea is that the legal system protects kids from things they don't understand. I'm pretty sure that the average child understands that some anonymous person on the internet cannot harm them and that they are probably just some other stupid kid. I wish parents would start actually raising their kids. My parents did a great job, and it was their first time.

Re:Please... (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704032)

Remember, these are the type of people that think hackers can see them through the monitor. They also think that everybody on the Internet that they don't know personally is a hacker.

Re:Please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704194)

How do you know I'm not. Also, I'm a 14 year old girl, with big boobs. Who likes Anime.

OK, Arrest me (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703884)

Just figure out who I am so you can find me.

It's not you he wants... (2, Informative)

michaelwigle (822387) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704162)

That's just another twist in this proposed law.

If the bill becomes law, the website operator would have to pay if someone was allowed to post anonymously on their site. The fine would be five-hundred dollars for a first offense and one-thousand dollars for each offense after that.
It's the site operators he's going after. Here's hoping /. has a big slush fund. Or will we just not be allowed to post AC anymore? I wish writing and trying to pass unenforcable, not to mention unconstitutional, laws wasn't a pass-time activity for some of our elected officials.

Re:It's not you he wants... (3, Insightful)

Lockejaw (955650) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704388)

I'm pretty sure the result would really just be to drive a lot of web hosts out of Kentucky.

Re:It's not you he wants... (1)

s.bots (1099921) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704410)

And what if the website isn't based in Kentucky (if this is a state-wide law) or outside the United States (if this is federal)? Should a webmaster have to research and obey all laws in all jurisdictions where someone could potentially visit their site? This just seems to be a little on the ridiculous side. If this bill passes and becomes an issue for webmasters, there will be a huge potential for outsourcing sites that value internet anonymity.

Just wait `til I get (1)

milatchi (694575) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703890)

Just wait `til I get my hands on him. I'll teach him not to mess with anonymous people on teh internets.

antagonistic (1)

mugnyte (203225) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703908)


  there's really no purpose in discussing this - its simply fodder for humor.

  with that said, methinks said politician would be quite chagrined to have his doings on TEH INTERWEBS completely revealed to the world.

  any takers?

support anonymity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703916)

All responses to this post should remain anonymous!

Not A Solution (4, Insightful)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703922)

If you don't want to be bullied online, stay offline.

And if you think any country's laws - including the USA's - can regulate the world-wide Internet, you're dreaming. All this law would accomplish is to cause the creation of anonymous blogging centers in countries with stricter privacy laws.

And by the way, hasn't the Supreme Court already said that you have a right to be anonymous online?

The only people who would benefit from this are the individuals, corporations, and politicians seeking to quash dissent by outing, and then suing, those who post unflattering comments, no matter how truthful. And those aren't the people I want to be helping out.

So if I write that Tim Couch is a dim bulb... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703924)

... am I breaking the law yet?

His name is what? (1)

PontifexMaximus (181529) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703934)

Tim Couch? You mean like the crappy NFL quarterback? It's not the same guy (I HAD to check), but seriously, he's offering this bill so people will stop crapping on his name. I mean really. If his name was Michael Jordan, he wouldn't submit this legislation.

Well in that case... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703942)

last post :(

In protest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703960)

Let's all post as AC to this subject!

So sue me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703964)

I'll keep posting as Anonymous Coward as long as Representative Couch keeps speaking as Incompetent Idiot.

Won't pass (2, Insightful)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703974)

Bills like this don't get anywhere in America. Unless he can come up with some religious reason to deny anonymous postings, there won't be any support from his constituency. You start messing with the first or second amendment in Kentucky and it's going to be an uphill battle.

His panties, they are wadded (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703978)

Well I think he's a cry baby and plan on giving him another wedgie tomorrow.

Awww geez (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22703982)

Hey why doesn't Tim Couch just shut up and give me his lunch money already? Sheesh.

Why stop there? (1)

ryanisflyboy (202507) | more than 6 years ago | (#22703990)

Hey Tim Couch,

Why not try to pass other non-enforcable laws too. Try these ones on:

"Tim Couch bans gravity in the state of Kentucky."
"Tim Couch raises speed limit for light."
"Tim Couch bans beer in all counties."
"Tim Couch raises smoking age from 18 to 64."

Why don't you actually pass a useful law that helps to reduce racisim, which is rampant in your state and is the core issue around much of the 'bullying' problem?

Re:Why stop there? (1)

danbert8 (1024253) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704146)

What kind of a law can reduce racism? I was under the impression that you could not legislate thoughts... If people are racist, laws sure as hell wont change it. How about we trying changing society to reduce racism instead of changing the government?

Re:Why stop there? (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704196)

Let's add to this, Hillary Clinton legislating that you would have to purchase health insurance.

*ahem* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704344)

"Tim Couch raises speed limit for light."
That should be "Tim Couch lowers speed limit for light." - These law makers would never raise the speed limit - too much money to be made with fines. :)

See, KY lowers the speed limit, and anyone who uses light that goes over that limit has to pay $150.

After all, it will make the streets safer!

Re:Why stop there? (1)

faloi (738831) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704526)

If he wanted to stamp out racism, he'd be better served leaning on his counterparts in California, Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey. Or any of the other 22 states that ranked higher in race motivated hate crime offense per the FBI [statemaster.com] . Or at least he'd be better served if he thought he could regulate thought.

Enforcement? Constitutionality? Jurisdiction? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704014)

All things that need to be clearly thought out before a stupid law like this is passed.

On a side note, can someone modify the form letter for solutions to spam for this situation - I'm too lazy.

Cut down on bullying.. (3, Interesting)

StarfishOne (756076) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704020)

like in real life where most bullies know their names of their victims. No one is bullied in real life as we all know! No one is being bullied even though teachers and parents are fully aware of it!

So let's find some thing (internet) to yell about because you don't like it (because you cannot control it)

Yeah, what's "real"? (1)

kimgkimg (957949) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704034)

Uh yeah real "name" and real "email" address. Apparently doesn't know anything about Mailinator or BugMeNot...

Stupid fucking redneck retard assholes (-1, Flamebait)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704040)

HELLO!!!

Your stupid arrogant little piddly-ass dumb-fuck laws in KENTUCKY have no bearing on me in Canada. Or my sister in the UK. Or the best man at my wedding in Australia. Or even my ex-girlfriend in Oregon. Or even my assistant's parents in fucking OHIO. Or anywhere else on this planet outside of the benighted state of Kentucky.

Good gawd, when are these fools going to get a clue that there's a whole big wide world out there that doesn't give a flying fuck about them or their piddly little problems, and that making laws in your state that regulates an international system of data transmission is little more than arm-waving flautus? Somebody, PLEASE make these idiots either shut up or go away. PLEASE.

RS

Re:Stupid fucking redneck retard assholes (1)

j_166 (1178463) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704368)

"Your stupid arrogant little piddly-ass dumb-fuck laws in KENTUCKY have no bearing on me in Canada."

Then why are you so upset about it?

Online bullying is an oxymoron (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704042)

As far as I am concerned you can only bully people in the real world. Physical violence should be what the state is interested in preventing.

Now we have hate crimes and other thought crimes and talking to people with unkind words is now considered violence.

And don't talk to be about that suicide girl. Suicide is too complicated to prevent with legislation. And plenty of people don't commit suicide because someone says some words to them.

Yes to govt. regulation (1)

homer_s (799572) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704072)

We absolutely need govt. regulation for websites. Greedy private companies, looking out only for their own profit will do nothing to stop problems such as online bullying, adult content targeted toward children, spam, etc.

It is a loony libertarian idea to say that private individuals and companies, left to themselves will sort it out.

Re:Yes to govt. regulation (1)

Itninja (937614) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704338)

Didn't you read Lord of the Flies? Everybody knows that, when left to their own devices, good people will always be nearly wiped out by ugly red-headed children. A person can be good, but people are dicks. Maybe evolution will spawn a conscience mutation soon.

More stupidity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704084)

Bullying is pretty pathetic and adults should be capable of standing up for themselves without running to the state for protection. If laws like this are passed, there'll be a number of people playing the victim every time someone pokes fun at them. We already have laws covering slander and liable and complete online anonymity is difficult.

If anyone ever deserved bullying, it's this senator.

Can't stop me! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704114)

See.

The easy way out (1)

free space (13714) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704116)

So instead of trying to analyze the problem of cyber-bullying and trying to find a real solution, this guy wants to prevent a completely normal, and often useful, activity.

How did this guy become a lawmaker? Law is all about balancing rights of many segments of society (sometimes conflicting). You can't just pass a law to help a certain segment while instantly treading on the rights of everyone else. Or perhaps he thinks being anonymous online is "no big deal" unless you're a bully or something.

Re:The easy way out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704482)

I thought laws in the US were about balancing the desires of businesses and the lawmaker's own bank account.

They.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704144)

They'll never get me alive!

Yes! Please do this! (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704166)

I think it's a great idea, the US can fuck up the internet on their side as much as possible, then all us Europeans can make more money from the increase in US users to our websites.

Fine for anonymous user (1)

cpbrown (794387) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704174)

His bill would require posters to register with their real names and e-mail addresses under threat of fines.
So how exactly do they intend to prosecute anonymous persons?

Re:Fine for anonymous user (1)

querist (97166) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704522)

They'll contact the RIAA for advice on that one. They seem to be allowed to file myriad "v John Doe" legal actions.

Yay for KY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704192)

And people wonder why every time we hear someone with a southern twang, we automatically assume he's dumb as a post?

All right, I'll grant rural PA honorary southerner status for this one.

I'll post this one anonymously just for grins.

Kentucky? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704208)

For those outside the US that don't know when it comes to US States: Kentucky is our retarded cousin (possibly caused by inbreeding). Please ignore him.


Mr. A. Coward

WTF happened to anonimity? (1)

RobBebop (947356) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704210)

Next, they will attempt to ban attempts to disguise your identity in public by wearing masks [wikipedia.org] .

Posting disparaging comments online is analogous to meeting in a library and making disparaging comments. The latter is protected by the Bill of Rights under the Freedom of Assembly. The former should be protected by the same bill.

And besides... anonymous posts online can technically be traced back to an IP address and that can be traced to a specific computer with a specific location and knowing the time can aid you to determine a specific person. Thus, the notion that anonymous cowards are truly anonymous is flawed. So if somebody posts something truly, then the coward can be traced and identified so criminal charges can be pressed.

Re:WTF happened to anonimity? (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704418)

I remember when somebody robbed a jewelry store where I live. They charged them with wearing a disguise while committing a crime, along with a bunch of other things. So, indeed, under certain circumstances, it is illegal to hide your identity.

And I want to ban anonymous admendments (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704266)

Gee, doesn't congress attach the embarrassing bits anonymously?

Good Luck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704280)

Let us know how that turns out. For every control you try to put in place a hundred different holes will be found.

Dale Gribble (aka Rusty Shackleford)... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704284)

"I wish the government would just ban itself. Wrap your heads around that one, fellas."

Let them pass it... (1)

DigitalisAkujin (846133) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704316)

and then watch the bill burn in a flame of un-enforceability. We can join with our 4chan brethren, sing cumbaya around the fire, and make marshmallows. :)

Pedobear not allowed. I don't want the FBI Party van showing up. Those damn bastards have no sense of fun...... I tried to spark a joint and the bastards tried to arrest me!

Isn't this person being... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704320)

rather narrowminded? He does not seem to take into account the vast ramifications his proposal would have. It wouldn't just effect what he mentioned, it would potentially effect ALL online postings(in Kentucky).

Anonymous response (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704362)

Just in case this gets passed, I am going to take advantage of the anonymous coward option a bit more now on Slashdot. I want to feel that I got my fair use's worth. This doesn't mean I am going to post anything insightful or funny, but I have to get my money's worth, though I am not how you get your money's worth of something that is free - oh, well.

If this ever gets passed /. needs to mourn this by making every comment on that day an anonymous one :)

Re:Anonymous response (1)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704502)

Just in case this gets passed, I am going to take advantage of the anonymous coward option a bit more now on Slashdot. I want to feel that I got my fair use's worth. This doesn't mean I am going to post anything insightful or funny, but I have to get my money's worth, though I am not how you get your money's worth of something that is free - oh, well.

Well look on the bright side, if you ever go on holiday outside of the states then you will be free to post anonymously to your hearts content.

If this ever gets passed /. needs to mourn this by making every comment on that day an anonymous one :)

Hmm, that seems to be incompatible with Karma whoring. You do realise this is likely to cause Karma whores to go mad.

Jurisdiction (1)

Woundweavr (37873) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704406)

Anyone want to explain to me how I, a resident of Massachusetts, am subject to the laws of Kentucky? Forget whether anonymity is generally protected by the 1st Amendment (which I believe it is according to the SCOTUS and common sense), simple lack of jurisdiction makes this fail.

Even if the law was framed as a requirement by Kentucky website "operators", if the operator is also anonymous, how do you prove he's a Kentucky resident (and thus subject to this law)?

o rly? (1)

chiefbutz (924863) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704432)

Is this some how manages to pass, good luck getting everyone to follow it. No one will. This is just another stupid senator, trying to do stupid things to try and get more votes.

Let's see if I have this straight (2, Insightful)

taustin (171655) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704442)

We need to ban anonymous posting to the internet because bullies who post anonymously are hard to track down.

So we'll make them register their names and email addresses with the state.

But they can get literally thousands of email address, for free, from services that aren't subject to our state's (or even country's) laws, and there is no mechanism even possible to police what email address or name they actually use, so they can continue to post anonymously.

And even though we can't track down anonymouse cyber bullies now, we'll be able to later, when they're not using the name or email address they registered with the state.

In addition to having no effect whatsoever, we will give them a legal defense of "Well, that's not my name or email adress! I registered those with the state, just like the law requires, so how could it be me?"

This doesn't even look like an attempt to "do something." In fact, it looks more like an attempt to protect bullies than punish them.

Whatever will happen to 4chan? (1)

baka_toroi (1194359) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704460)

Probably something like this: Hai, guise, I've just registered here! >Newfag >Newfag >Newfag is new >Lurk moar

Unprecedented! (1, Interesting)

kahei (466208) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704472)

That's as ridiculous as banning an article of clothing that can be used to disguise identity [thisislondon.co.uk] ! It could never happen! THE VERY THOUGHT IS PREPOSTEROUS!!

Then again, as far as the hoodie ban goes, anything that even makes an attempt at reclaiming the UK's streets is welcome, whatever the free-speech implications.

Bullying on the internet, however, can be addressed more effectively by simply rotating 180 degrees until one's face is no longer pointing toward the screen. Further measures may include going out, getting some fresh air, and finding a nice hobby.

Lawmaker apparently has a stranglehold of /. too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22704496)

Considering that nearly all AC posts start at -1, wow, this guy has some power!

Scientology (4, Interesting)

pryoplasm (809342) | more than 6 years ago | (#22704546)

Could this have any correlation to the protests against scientology? Perhaps in response to the protest on the 15th?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...