encyclopedia dramatica's article on aboriginals (http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Aboriginal) has been added to Australian Communications & Media Authority's (ACMA's) blacklist (http://www.blog.encyclopediadramatica.com/?p=84), and google australia is censoring ED's article in their search results as well (while simultaneously threatening to pull out of china in defiance of their censorship laws).
the australian government is also threatening legal action against the owner of ED, and he can never set foot on australian soil for the time being or will be most likely put under arrest. according to him, he has family there.
http://www.blog.encyclopediadramatica.com/?p=84 (http://www.blog.encyclopediadramatica.com/?p=84)
despite what you may think of ED, i think that its existence and this event is important. like wikileaks, they are not afraid to excercise freedom of speech and refuse to cave in to unecessary censorship and threats. ACMA's actions have demonstrated some of the frightening things going on in this world, most obviously the extent that this australian internet filter is a stranglehold on personal freedoms under the guise of "protecting children." according to wikipedia:
QuoteApproximately half of the sites on the list were not related to child pornography, and included online gambling sites, YouTube pages, gay, straight, and fetish pornography sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions, Christian sites, and even the websites of a tour operator and a Queensland dentist.
the same thing that is going on in communist china is happening in the "democracy" of australia. and for those of who don't know, this internet filter - if implemented - will be
mandatory for all australians.
imagine if the FCC tried to regulate american internet and decide what you could and couldn't see.
thats fucking horrible
if i were australian i would be in the streets picketing right now
in other news ssaf's http://drewpickles.com (http://drewpickles.com) has been banned since 2008
(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffiles.fuckinslack.com%2Fuploads%2Fno.jpg&hash=e5822a949f86ba8d97aa8d256afa04c5b1ebfd26)
Old news is old, they will probably end up banning I have frequent fantasies of a Dugtrio thrusting all of it's phallic bodies into my deepest cavities, sending me into a state of infinite, indescribable pleasure. If I could not have a Dugtrio, a Diglett would suffice as well. and Youtube as a whole and everything else like that, the shits so easy to get around even the dumb kids they are trying to protect can get around it with ease, i just dont see the point.
Quote from: GerkinmanI have frequent fantasies of a Dugtrio thrusting all of it's phallic bodies into my deepest cavities, sending me into a state of infinite, indescribable pleasure. If I could not have a Dugtrio, a Diglett would suffice as well.
wow u are one sick fucker u know that ill never see u the same
Quote from: GerkinmanOld news is old
I didn't know you were a gay, wow what a pleasantry.
So they have only blacklisted this one article due racism? Or what exactly was their reason? There's so much racism on the internet... this is just ridiculous nit-picking.
I knew a thousand better reasons to censor or put legal action against ED (and these reasons in fact are what make me like the site so much), and this is more than just a pathetic excuse of censorship. This totally subverts the freedom of speech and using the site owner as the scapegoat (as someone who isn't even directly responsible for the content, especially not for the content of a parody wiki for extreme internet cultures), threatening him with legal actions and forbidding him to even visit their cuntry just shows how conservative and dumb these people are...
I despeartely wait for the day when my generation will make the politics
Quote from: GerkinmanOld news is old
march 15th?
Quote from: rtilQuote from: GerkinmanOld news is old
march 15th?
dude thats like 5 days ago welcome to the internet shits lightning fast if u didnt know ur not with it grandpa
wow
i dont even like or frequent ED one bit but that's fucking ridiculous
WITH A CAPITAL R
i hate ED and in all honesty i wish it were banned in more places but at the same time i realize that the control of what we can see is [retty bad
we shouldnt have what is possible to be viewed controlled, we shou;d just ban actions that we wouldnt want people to see
for example: seeing a child nude should not be pleasurable but SHOULD be ok by itself. for example i saw a film called baraka and they have scenes of african tribes where the children are nude etc
the thing that should be controlled is when kids are hurt and abused. if that didnt happen then there would be no child pornography. now of course obviously that\\\'s impossible but still
the point is that the problem stems from the actions and not what is possible to be seen. child porn is illegal and it SHOULD be, but we should be spending more time finding the people who create it than trying to protect people from it
While I do agree that banning sites in some places goes agaisnt freedom of speech, I can see why are they trying to ban the site in question.
most ED articles are just inflamatory and/or offensive and personally I wouldnt care if they dont let me read it
Quote from: sentryWhile I do agree that banning sites in some places goes agaisnt freedom of speech, I can see why are they trying to ban the site in question.
most ED articles are just inflamatory and/or offensive and personally I wouldnt care if they dont let me read it
so you\\\'re in favor of government-sponsored censorship, aka a couple of old men get to decide what you can and can\\\'t see?
what if it affected the sites you browse? how would you feel then?
Quote from: Uncle Tоmi hate ED and in all honesty i wish it were banned in more places but at the same time i realize that the control of what we can see is [retty bad
we shouldnt have what is possible to be viewed controlled, we shou;d just ban actions that we wouldnt want people to see
for example: seeing a child nude should not be pleasurable but SHOULD be ok by itself. for example i saw a film called baraka and they have scenes of african tribes where the children are nude etc
the thing that should be controlled is when kids are hurt and abused. if that didnt happen then there would be no child pornography. now of course obviously that\\\'s impossible but still
the point is that the problem stems from the actions and not what is possible to be seen. child porn is illegal and it SHOULD be, but we should be spending more time finding the people who create it than trying to protect people from it
it is possible - it\\\'s called responsible parenting. parents need to be responsible for their kids internet usage and what they see online. the government cannot take the place of the parent, and when they do, this is what happens
hey remember when some conservative faggots tried to ban sexual rock and roll music from existence
No, i dont agree, but I can see why they did it with ED or at least that article in particular. I think making publications that are racist and potentially offensive towards an ethnic group and using the "freedom of speech" argument to defend them is out of place. Wether it is serious or just a joke.
Still i guess that doesnt mean they have the right to ban it. I mean technically the correct thing should be for anyone to be able to browse these websites if they want.
The only sites that I dont approve are child porn/rape/openly malicious sites.
Quote from: Flashhey remember when some conservative faggots tried to ban sexual rock and roll music from existence
Well then burzum and co came around and started burning churches and killing each other. Now Nergal of Behemoth is facing jail time for burning bibles.
I love ED.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality)
ed gives me viruses despite me having my firewalls up and my internet protection avast running help
Quote from: sentryNo, i dont agree, but I can see why they did it with ED or at least that article in particular. I think making publications that are racist and potentially offensive towards an ethnic group and using the "freedom of speech" argument to defend them is out of place. Wether it is serious or just a joke.
in what way is it out of place? as long as you are not directly harming anyone, you should have the freedom to say whatever you want despite how intolerant or blatantly racist it is. freedom of speech isn\\\'t an argument, it\\\'s a human right.
no one is making people look at ED. it doesn\\\'t need to be censored
Quote from: rtilQuote from: sentryNo, i dont agree, but I can see why they did it with ED or at least that article in particular. I think making publications that are racist and potentially offensive towards an ethnic group and using the "freedom of speech" argument to defend them is out of place. Wether it is serious or just a joke.
in what way is it out of place? as long as you are not directly harming anyone, you should have the freedom to say whatever you want despite how intolerant or blatantly racist it is. freedom of speech isn't an argument, it's a human right.
no one is making people look at ED. it doesn't need to be censored
yeah, freedom of speech doesn't exist to protect popular speech. popular speech doesn't need protection, it exists to protect UNPOPULAR speech.
ed sucks lol its for unfunny 4channer faggots
OH I NEED TO RESEARCH THIS MEME ITS EPIC FOR THE WIN
who cares
Quote from: BamyasiI love ED.
4chan is really cool pease agree
Quote from: dvvebbbsiuoQuote from: BamyasiI love ED.
4chan is really cool pease agree
Sure why not.
who fuckin cares if its just ED this is a violation of their rights as australians
they live in a democracy for christ's sake
if I was australian and my government banned 4chan and ED I would get on their knees and suck their dicks and thank them profusely
hurr hurr if dey banned 4chan I WUD BE QUITE PLEASED MM YES HERPDADERP
4chan is my favorite website
australian government has been consistently retarded
Quote from: RobHalfordWell then burzum and co came around and started burning churches and killing each other. Now Nergal of Behemoth is facing jail time for burning bibles.
Is that true? Since when does a modern democracy as Poland connect religion to the law? I thought legal punishment for expressing you despite against the church ended with the middle ages... I can burn as many bibles as I want for it is my fucking as long as they are my property. Seriously, what the hell?
Quote from: anigened gives me viruses despite me having my firewalls up and my internet protection avast running help
Sadly, that somehow is true...
Quote from: rtilin what way is it out of place? as long as you are not directly harming anyone, you should have the freedom to say whatever you want despite how intolerant or blatantly racist it is. freedom of speech isn't an argument, it's a human right.
no one is making people look at ED. it doesn't need to be censored
The keywords are "the tolerance of intolerance". If those people try to create more tolerance, they should start tolerating my intolerance for everything else would make them intolerant as well.
that seems a little edgy i dont know. i mean i guess i don't know if i would say that tolerating hate and stupidity is a good idea. wouldn't that just lead those stupid and hateful people to group together, which would probably lead the actual action which could be harmful to innocent people? i guess in that case one could just punish those who actually ACT and not those who just have opinions
yeah i guess that makes sense
Being intolerant doesn't mean I'm acting. Expressing this opinion is a kind of act but the question is where the gray zone starts... As long as I'm not mobilizing a mob with an inflammatory speech I'm not really committing a crime.
Quote from: KottQuote from: RobHalfordWell then burzum and co came around and started burning churches and killing each other. Now Nergal of Behemoth is facing jail time for burning bibles.
Is that true? Since when does a modern democracy as Poland connect religion to the law? I thought legal punishment for expressing you despite against the church ended with the middle ages... I can burn as many bibles as I want for it is my fucking as long as they are my property. Seriously, what the hell?
http://www.metalsucks.net/2010/03/09/behem...ion-of-a-bible/ (http://www.metalsucks.net/2010/03/09/behemoths-nergal-faces-up-to-two-years-in-prison-for-destruction-of-a-bible/)
Quote from: Uncle Tоmthat seems a little edgy i dont know. i mean i guess i don't know if i would say that tolerating hate and stupidity is a good idea. wouldn't that just lead those stupid and hateful people to group together, which would probably lead the actual action which could be harmful to innocent people? i guess in that case one could just punish those who actually ACT and not those who just have opinions
yeah i guess that makes sense
that is the point - it's the difference between saying something and acting upon it. i mean, yeah you can get in trouble for certain things you might be dumb enough to say, like pre-meditative murder, but ED is a troll site filled up with the most offensive things people behind a screen can think of. whether a government chooses to censor it or not is a testament to whether they truly believe in free speech or not, which i do believe is a human right.
in the grand scheme of things, this has nothing to do with ED or 4chan - which some of you of course entirely missed. this is one of those slippery-slope scenarios where if you say this one thing should be banned, then it leads to another and another, to a point where everything is so watered down you become a slave to the state bureaucracy where only certain things can come out of your mouth or you could end up in prison.
even now you can get fined $11,000/day for every day you have a link up to an ACMA banned site if you're an australian domain.
does Australia have a bill of rights
on another note does anyone care about Australia
they don't, but they do have a constitution
Quote from: anigened gives me viruses despite me having my firewalls up and my internet protection avast running help
i dont even run on av on most of my windows machines and ive never had a problem ever what
yea who needs antivirus thats for fucken noobs
yeh man wtf he he