Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Your Rights Online

Website Bans Woman With "Unacceptable" Name 70

Posted by Hemos from the could-i-use-my-last-name? dept.
Barbarian writes "In an example of censorware gone awry, Digital Freedom Network reports on how the website Blackplanet.com will not let a woman register because her name contains the word "cock", as do many last names. Thinking it was an oversight, she emailed the site administrators and was told, "unfortunately, the letters that form the word 'Cock' is [sic] unacceptable and will not be recognized by our system." The site intends to continue using the censorware, and if the woman wants to register, she can change her name."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Website Bans Woman With "Unacceptable" Name More

Website Bans Woman With "Unacceptable" Name

Comments Filter:

  • SO has anyone tried other names (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    will it accept Mike Ocksore? I.P. Freely? Amanda Hugginkiss (Yes I do like the Simpsons)
  • Have they heard from Johnny Coc(k)hran yet?
  • What about people named Dick?

  • my company's solution (Score:3)

    by ChristTrekker ( 91442 ) on Monday August 21, 2000 @05:19AM (#840693)

    My company had a client that wanted to filter "unacceptable" names like this. However, our solution was to have the "unacceptable" name entry send a flag by email to the client. The client then had an admin interface to manually permit/deny access. This kept the undesirables off the system, yet permitted legitimate uses of certain letter combinations. Seems like the ideal solution, to me.

  • If they're so narrow-minded as to refuse service to the (large) segment of the population whose names just happen to contain an "objectionable" name as a substring, then they will find it difficult to obtain or grow market share, and therefore receive advertising revenue. So, I think this bozo will find it extremely difficult to make a living with these ridculous policies in effect.
  • My last name is "Fuks" and go.com/infoseek.com did not let me register either. Or rather, they automatically suspended the account upon registration due to "inappropriate" name. Emails asking to review that action went unanswered.
  • I really don't think that this is too serious of a problem. This is NOT taking her rights for granted or any other of the whoopla that likes to get page hits here on /.

    Your name is rejected. Here's a simple solution...GO ELSEWHERE. The website is obviously run by incompetent people who care more about posterity than content so why would you want to be associated with them anyways? Anyways, even in this case its not even about posterity, just a silly naming convention.
    Regardless of whether its wrong or right it is still THEIR server. If you don't like it, write a letter to the webmaster once again stating why their convention is silly and explain why you will not visit their site (also mention that you will not encourage others to visit either).
    Simply: They are incompetent. You have a choice. Exercise your choice.

    Examine you in your present, for you may not exist in your future.


    -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
  • Just another ridiculous attempt to save us from ourselves.

    If you don't fit into the mold, then you cannot use our software|website|service. This theme has been repeated throughout history and it's no suprise that it's showing up here.

    Censorware is wrong in the same that bookburning is wrong. The problem is, both systems are still in effect.

    --

  • Also is she really banned as the National Enquiresque title suggests? Could she not simple just initialize her last name if she truly wanted to be apart of the service? Man, some things are not worth the fight. (And for all others, there is beer).




    -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
  • This is just another example of how censorware will never work. The problem is that there is currently no way for censoring software to examine material in the proper context. Until, someone creates software which can accurately parse sentences and examine words in the proper context, it will continue to be very easy to bypass these filters. It is like comparing a packet-filtering firewall to a statefull inpection firewall. The simple filter is only good for certain tasks.

    I'm really surprised at the response from the web site that they will not allow here to register her name. I wonder if any of their current members will complain about it. Bad publicity is never good for business.

  • Re:Really..whats the problem? (Score:3)

    by don_carnage ( 145494 ) on Monday August 21, 2000 @05:39AM (#840700) Homepage
    Here's a simple solution...GO ELSEWHERE.

    So if this were a large corporations site like CDNow or Buy.com or even Amazon, would you have the same attitude? I think larger coporations are forced to adhere to higher standards.

    You should not cope with the problem -- you should work to solve the problem.

    --

  • I remember WAAAAY back, when AOL first installed a system wide keyword based filter. This was stricken with a similar problem when a guy in Scunthorpe, England tried to register his address. The solution from the tech support (when they had finally figured out what the problem was), was to change the spelling until they had a chance to upgrade their filtering software on the entire network.

    Great to see the same mistakes being made by dumbass companies today!

    AOL - putting the c*nt in Scunthorpe :-)


    "Give the anarchist a cigarette"
  • That is what part of my solution was: Contact the webmaster and threaten.

    In response to your "large corporation site" problem, it would not happen. They depend on the public image because they are VERY well known sites. If a company that size were facing such a problem, I guarantee that the sites policy would change (as soon as it would hit one of the web's thousands of news places../. included). That is why I was merely stating that for a smaller website that comes a dime a dozen, it really is not worth the aggravation. This is afterall simply a naming convention.


    -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

  • It Just Occured to Me... (Score:4)

    by jyuter ( 48936 ) <jyuterNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday August 21, 2000 @05:54AM (#840703) Homepage Journal
    Remember John Hancock? This filtering would also ban the Declaration Of Independence!



    Being with you, it's just one epiphany after another
  • Try this [tripod.co.uk] for a slightly deeper discussion on the subject. If you can read the whole thing, your internet isn't being filtered.

    the AC
  • Imagine if King George was never given the Declaration of Indepence, because his secretary 'filtered' it.

    "But it was signed by some porn star named John Hanc*ck! I nearly fainted when I read it! His name violated my civil rights!"
  • So if this were a large corporations site like CDNow or Buy.com or even Amazon, would you have the same attitude? I think larger coporations are forced to adhere to higher standards.

    But this is precisely the point. CDNow and Amazon are keen enough to do well that they can't afford to piss people off like this. Therefore they try not to. Ideally, when you complain to one of them because some short-sightedness of their has led to a situation like this, their immediate proffessional reaction should be to apologise profusely and send you a $10 voucher, at which point they stand the chance of impressing you sufficiently that you become a valued customer.

    Reactions to little things like this are precisely how you tell a company that has excellent processes and a high level of awareness of customer service from the lame ducks run by millionaire-whizzkid-wannabes that only make them rich becauses people hurl money at anything with a full stop in the name that happens to float on the market.

    I agree with the original post, and the one that came before it in this discussion - let the market decide. I've seen this thread, read the names of the companies concerned, and they have fallen in my esteem. Not that won't affect them, but the overall effect of carrying on with such policies over time will mean that a sufficient number of people will end up feeling like me, and even if they don't completely stop using these services, they will look elsewhere first.

    The same thing happened with my Amazon purchases - I realised they were not that cheap, and now I go to shopsmart.com first. Sometimes I still end up on Amazon, but only when they've got something that makes me go there (out of print books, or maybe I want really quick delivery, or whatever) that is also worth the price premium.

    Market power rules - especially in a medium where going to another shop requires less than half a calorie spent typing in a different web address.

  • Typos (Score:1)

    by nlvp ( 115149 )
    There were a really embarassing number of typos in that message - apologies to all. It's the caffeine - honest - it mmmaakkkes typpingg diffficultt.
  • You are the market. You decide. Take matters into your own hands. I would not be one to sit around and wait for the market to kill the website. What if 98% of the people don't have a problem, then what?

    If this arguement were about browser compatibility then people would be outraged.

    What, you've made a site that's only compatible with M$??!! For shame!

    --

  • Then there is no problem. They enjoy the site, have followed the site's rules and are getting their content's worth. Case closed.
    There are NO laws that are being broken and only 1 person's name has been under scrutiny. It is a shame. They should fix it. Go elsewhere.


    -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

  • flip side: mandatory account names (Score:3)

    by coyote-san ( 38515 ) on Monday August 21, 2000 @07:18AM (#840711)
    This is mildly off-topic, but I'm reminded of the problems that occur when sites use mandatory account name policies.

    A few jobs back the company policy was "first initial, last name." They stuck to that policy even when D. Adcock came on board. Even though I worked with the individual and am fairly laid back, I never got used to that account name. I suspect she rarely used the company email to contact people outside of the company.

    At least she had the option at that time. Today, you'll find more work being forced onto web sites. It's not hard to foresee a world where employees are terminated because one bunch of whiny children insists that "We don't have to change our site, you change your account name!" and another bunch of whiny children insists that "We don't have to change our site's account name policy, you change your site!" and the only person actually trying to do something productive is left out in the cold.
  • What do you mean "Sigh"? Why should 98% of people who are content with a service be deprived of it because you have a problem with it? That's not democracy, it's not "the market", and it's not "you being the market". It's just small-minded selfishness.

    I'm as opposed to minorities being discriminated against as anyone, and, like most people, being part of a diverse set of individuals, I probably belong to a few minorities depending how you care to define them. But that doesn't mean I think the success or failure of a company should hinge on whether their filters accept my name. As it happens, I've yet to come across a website that can handle my name because they can't do accents, and they tend to have maximum field lengths that are shorter than my surname.

    If the company's actions are due to an endemic problem with their customer service or the quality of their business practices then fine - they deserve to fail, and the market will ensure they will as they will be outcompeted by other players and 98% of the customers will end up leaving - all for their own reasons.

    But 2% of people being upset with a service is not a trend - it could be either an error term, or it could, in some cases, be a business decision - maybe the company doesn't want that 2% of the business, because it costs them 20% of their effort to go and pander to those customers.

    If I'm in the 98%, I don't want a bunch of discontents killing a service I use because their names happen to get jammed in a filter. Luckily, it's quite rare for that 2% to have the ability to kill off the business, so I'm safe. If I'm in the 2%, and because of my name, I quite often am, I'll find another service, it's only a click away - although usually a phone call is enough to fix the problem if I'd rather stick with the site in question.

  • Sadly not true. I was able to get to the site listed, but I'm often not able to get to other sites mentioned in YROL because of filtering. It's just more evidence of how ineffective internet filtering is, that some sites that really seem as though they might be blocked by filtering software aren't but others (like ESR's home page on my system) are.

  • Until, someone creates software which can accurately parse sentences and examine words in the proper context, it will continue to be very easy to bypass these filters.

    You're forgetting one thing: trolls have lousy grammar. Although a filter that blocked bad grammar might not be a bad idea...

  • As it happens, I've yet to come across a website that can handle my name because they can't do accents, and they tend to have maximum field lengths that are shorter than my surname.

    So you move on. And then find another website with the same problem. And you move on again. This isn't the way things are supposed to work!

    I may be reaching here, but what percentage of the populous is disabled? Probably a lot smaller than the percentage that isn't. Right? So when a store doesn't have an access ramp, for example, does that mean that they just have to "deal with it" and go somewhere else? Merely coping with a problem will get you nowhere.

    Sometimes, it's in a companies best interest to "pander" to the 2% -- you never know, they may account for 60% of your sales.

    --

  • Oh yeah...and: "Why should 98% of people who are content with a service be deprived of it because you have a problem with it?"

    I never said deprive them of the service. Not using (or re-writing) censorware does not deprive someone of a service.

    --

  • Not nearly as severe, but back in the days of FidoNet, I posted a message on a message board, only to hear from the moderator that my message had been cancelled.

    "Please use your real name." the moderator said. I guess people assume that "Conan" is a real name only in movies and comic books?

    --
  • It's not the cafeine that causes your typing problems. If it was the cafeine, you would correct your typos before you make the errors. But if you know the errors before you make them, would you still make them. Hmmm....

    You know you drink too much coffeee when... [sorehands.com]

  • If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

    One may think, "big deal." And it may be true, for this problem. But then what about the next?

  • I agree with the companys decision to enforce non rude names.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Asspenis Virginfucka

  • The World's Worst Email Address (Score:5)

    by Demiah ( 79313 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2000 @01:04AM (#840721)
    Reminds me of an old article I ran into on Usenet a few years back..

    A student at college, Mary Emily Cummins fell foul of the institute's email address policy.

    They took the first six letters of the surname followed by the initials of the forname. She ended up with cumminme@something.edu.

    Would they allow her to change it? Of course not.
  • "Trolls have lousy grammar".

    You are entirely wrong, my friend . . . .


    ...and you misused a colon in your first sentence; a semicolon was appropriate.

  • The moral descisions regarding usage of the Net in the US never siezes to amaze me and give me a good laugh occasionally. The sad thing is just that is not really funny. There never seems to be any limitation of how far stupidity can reach.
  • No, they will actually make a living. They are Uta state library compliant for example ;-)
  • Oi, grammar Nazi, read a grammar book. That colon was fine and dandy; any reference will tell you a colon can be used to mean 'viz' or 'namely' in such situations. Get a life.
  • I don't know if this is true or if it was just company lore, but when I worked at Computer City almost 4 years ago my boss told me about how a cashier was nearly fired for giving a computer city discount card to someone with the name of "Samuel Asshole". The company's computers in Texas were designed to flag fraudulent names, well "Samuel Asshole" apparantly set off bells and whistles as well. The cashier was found and pulled aside by his/her manager and grilled about the "Asshole" customer. This cashied swore up and down that "Samuel Asshole" was the guy's name, as a part of the company's investigation the telephone number given by the customer was called and a man claiming to be Mr. Asshole answered. He was asked to come in to the store because this cashier was about to be fired for pulling such a prank. He came in and produced a driver's license in the name os "Samuel Asshole"

    If this story is true, it can't be the first time something like this happened to this man. Why not just change the name?

    Remember that SNL skit about "Asswipe Jones"?

    LK
  • I don't think that it's unreasonable for a company to do business in such a way that they assume that the vast majority of people's names will fit into a certain length character field.

    If your name being truncated means that my bill is lower because the company doesn't have to pay for specialty printing equipment, I'm sorry but it's not worth making 20 people "feel better" about something if you have to gouge 20000 people to do so.

    LK
  • People have used their names to get attention for years. Remember that gay rights activist who heckled president Clinton back in 1993 or so?

    He had his name legally changed to "Luke Sissyfag". You wouldn't believe how funny it was to hear Phil Donahue have a conversation with the man "So, Luke, uh Mr. Sissyfag.....um ah, well, what do you think about this?"

    If I wanted to change my name to Harry Cockenballs, I'd expect people not to like it. I'd expect it to be blocked. However it is pure idiocy when the rules of these systems are so inflexible that they can't be overridden by a supervisor.

    If my name was Michael Dick, or Bruce Butt I'd be upset if I couldn't make use of it in my email address.

    BTW I do know a cop named Bruce Butt.

    LK
  • As an experiment I tried to register on this site as "Emily Dickinson". No dice.

    Is this really the best use of censorship? Assuming there is a good use of censorship, this certainly isn't it.

    Let's have a contest to find out how many legitimate names would be blocked by censorware crap like this.

    Here are a few entries:

    • Dick Nixon
    • Jack Offenbach

    I think you get the idea.

  • You obviously don't understand how computers work.

    ROFL, that was a good one.

    You apparently have never studied data structures. I'm going to assume that the database app is coded in C/C++. That in mind, names are likely to be stored as NULL terminated strings.

    It would be easy program the system to read the bitstream for my name until it hits a stop bit.

    Since we're dealing with characters and files instead of serial communications, I'd wager that they use a NULL instead of a stop bit.

    To speed database access it is likely that everyone's name records (first and last) are the same size. You can jump from customer #2333412's name to customer#2334542's name by just doing pointer arithmatic. So if you're name is Dean, I'd expect the record to list your name as Dean00000000000. So that Dean, Bob, Mohammed, Newt, whatever is stored in the same space. Last names would be no different. To maximize the speed of accessing the database, it's best to keep all records to the same size. Beyond that, there must be an arbitrary limit. What's reasonable? 10, 15, 30 characters? That's not my call to make. You have to balance access speed, media costs, and memory requirements against some people being sensitive because their unusually long name gets truncated.

    It's not like you can go down to office depot and pick up some extra memory for your RS6000 because you need an extra gigabyte of it to manage all of those unused zeros that you now have because you extended the length of your name data fields.

    If seeing your entire name on the bill is that important to you, fine. I'll just stick to whomever gives me the best prices and service.

    LK
  • Phil. K. Dick [google.com] couldn't register either. Of course, no repectable author would have such an offensive name.
  • Oh yeah, "My name is 'azzWEEP-A'." HAHAHAHA Or the current favorite... "The name is DUMAS." "Now that's thick-headed!"
  • The article states that the woman that is banned is an attorney.

    She should seriously consider filing a lawsuit.

    Parties named could possibly include the site, the people at the site who refuse to override the censorware and the company producing the censorware.

    Could set a very interesting precedent.
  • Actually he said that the rules could be overridden, but if he did that it would "amount to about 8000 manual entries."

    Basically it's one of those "if you do it for one you have to do it for all" things.

    -- Talonius
  • A woman where I worked had the name of Ennis and first initial P. She requested her middle initial (K) be used instead, to form "kennis". :-)
  • Why should he have to change his friggin *NAME* just because some computers don't like it?

    Not because some computers don't like it, because his name is ASSHOLE! Imagine getting attendance called in grade school..."Ass um, ah, Asshole, Samuel?" "Present".

    If you had to endure a lifetime of humiliation like that, would YOU want to pass that name and that humiliation on to your kids?

    LK
  • don, your post reminded me of a passage from an Arrested Development song:

    The reason I'm fishin' 4 a new religion
    is my church makes me fall asleep.
    They're praising a God that watches you weep
    and doesn't want you to do a damn thing about it.
    When they want change the preacher says "shout it."
    Does shouting bring about change? I doubt it.
    All shouting does is make. you. lose. your. voice.
    Sitting in church hearing legitimate woes.
    Pastor tells the lady it'll be alright; just pray so you can see the pearly gates so white.
    The lady prays and prays and prays and prays and
    prays and prays and prays and prays...it's everlasting;
    there's nothing wrong with praying -- it's what she's asking.
    She's asking the Lord to let her cope
    so one day she can see the golden ropes
    What you pray for God will give
    to be able to cope in this world we live.
    But the word "cope" and the word "change"
    are directly opposite, not the same.
    She should have been praying to change her woes
    but pastor said "Pray to cope with those".

    ___________________________
    \\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\ \//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\
    all pertinent quotes and cultural references, all the time.
  • Agreed. The word "cock" is a particularly common problem I encounter. For one, while I rarely use the word "cock" to describle poultry, others do, particularly in older literature, so I can't give certain quotations on censored messageboards. And, most annoyingly, the word "cockpit" is also usually censored. This is quite annoying when discussing jet planes in the Transformers Quake Message Board, for example. While these problems are minor, they're deliberate withholdings of service caused by a little squeamishness at foul language.
  • Kennis.. I like that.. it means knowledge in dutch..

    //rdj
  • Sticking to filters on the internet to start with - As I said in my post, I have a lot of trouble with the spelling of my name on most websites, but that doesn't stop me using the ones I want to use. Usually, a message to a sysadmin saying "I want to use your site, but I can't buy airline tickets if you can't put my name on them" has, twice, proved enough to solve the problem.

    In the case where they reply, "We can't be bothered to make a 2 minute effort to enable you to use our site", I move on, and if, for example, ebookers.com can't do it, then expedia probably can. I have yet to come across a situation, as you describe, where I can't track down any way of doing business.

    Of course, in the spirit of good debating, you expanded the argument to the non-internet world, and to disabled people, therefore somewhat changing the subject and adopting the moral high ground. Congratulations, good debating tactics.

    My answer to that comes is in three parts : (1) Is every single internet company therefore in the wrong because they don't enable their websites with special technology for the blind? (sorry, cheap shot)

    (2) Most shops in my part of the world have access ramps - but they don't put all their prices and descriptions of their goods in braille - does this represent discrimination against the blind? I suppose that in fact, they do what I suggested above - they adapt based on the individual request for help, and when a blind person turns up to shop, they assign a member of staff to take them through the store and help them with their shopping.

    I think that the real reason shops have access ramps is because the shops on our high-streets today are in such a competitive market that they can't afford to have second rate customer service in any respect. They have reached the point where their customer service is a major selling point, because if theirs is second rate, their neighbouring store will start snapping up their business. This will happen on the internet, but the market is still young, and there's enough easy business out there that branding is still much more important than service, so that's where the effort goes.

    (3) You compare the percentage of disabled people to the percentage of non-disabled people. But what about the percentage of disabled people compared to the percentage of people who (a) want to purchase from websites AND (b) have names that will get stuck in filters. I think we just went from around (guessing) 5% to 0.05%. We also have to bear in mind that neither of these groups is prevented from purchasing stuff either on the internet or in real life - there are always companies willing to go the extra mile, just not all companies.

  • I fully agree with you. Whenever the majority is "content with a service" they should under no circumstances "be deprived of it because [others] have a problem with it".

    For instance, the policies that extend benefits like health insurance to opposite sex spouses, but not long-term commited homosexual partners -- after all, the majority of people are hetrosexual. Or the policies posting the 10 commandments and other religious icons in public places in the US -- after all, the majority of people in this country are some variety of christians. We should even extend the principle to defend those laws requiring race-specific water fountains and bathrooms -- after all, the majority of people in this country are still white!

    All in all, a policy saying that anything goes so long as the majority agrees is a good policy. In this instance, the majority are pleased with the service, and are not being asked to change their names, so why ask for "special accomodations" (like allowing you to use your own name) for the minority?

    -- Michael Chermside

    PS: For those who didn't notice the sarcasm in the above piece and who think that I really believe it... I pity you. Really.

  • A buddy of mine went to high school with someone named Harold Dick. Harry Dick is obviously what they called him.

    I went to high school with a girl named Anita Seaman, while I'm at it there was an Anita Johnson as well.

    LK
  • Always thought that the race driver Dick Trickle had a fairly amusing name...

    --
  • I had a substitute teacher in high school named Richard Lipps.

  • This discussion reminds me of a scene from the movie Robin Hood: Men in Tights:

    Prince: Such an unusual name, "Latrine." How did your family come by it?
    Latrine: We changed it in the 9th century.
    Prince: You mean you changed it TO "Latrine"?
    Latrine: Yeah. Used to be "Shithouse."
    Prince: It's a good change. That's a good change!


  • Lawsuit? Against what? They don't have to let you on the site, regardless. Poor policy, sure, illegal, not a chance.

    Dave
  • Not an easy thing to do on-line
    But if you can talk them into faxing the policy and details in writing to you then do it.

    I'd probably go for media fuss becouse lawsutes are painful media fuss is painless and cheap.
    Plus you don't get accused of being greedy with media fuss becouse your not gona make any money off this..
    and once in the media it's the "peoples" cause not yours... you walk away and live your life...

    And millions of Slashdoters e-mail the site pushing for more details...
    eventually they'll cave ....

    Don't harrss or insult... just ask for details... be nice... just ask questions.. non pointed polite questions....
  • Barring a person for having an "unaceptable name" is discrimination...
    Sence this is pure censorship by name the website is pritty much dead in the water legally...
    However I think media exposure is better... It puts the website in the darkest light.... while she gets to live her own life in peace
  • I find it hilarious that this site, whose mission appears to be one of African-American empowerment, would itself discriminate. In this case, against a person with an "offensive" name. For whatever reason, it's still bigotry - right?
  • Moby Wienie?
  • The best was when ESPN was showing highlights of a NASCAR race in which one driver hit Trickle and started a huge pileup. The announcer couldn't resist the line, "now you see what happens when you tap Dick Trickle..."
  • Was "featured" on Letterman a few years back... wonder what he does for e-mail?

  • Your company's solution involves real live humans exercising intelligence and judgement while actually interacting with the customer, rather than accepting whatever the computer comes up with as superior and irrevocable, and treating the customer as a annoyance rather than a n asset.

    Too bad it won't be likely to start a trend.

  • "Shithouse" may be pushing it but there are folks around with the surname Outhouse. Has anybody tried that on some of these idiotware implementations?
  • More overhead though. Where do you draw the line? Larger files? Larger access, search, and sort times result when you go with extremely long or variable length name fields. I don't know about you, but I'd rather get my bill on time and at a lower price than have some yahoo with a 30 character name be happy with the way his account statement looks.

    LK
  • Not more litigation, since when do you have a "right" to log on to anothers server. The US has too much of this. I think the site owners are idiots but let the dollars talk. Preserve a few rights to control your own property even if stupidly.
  • Discrimination is not illegal.

    I can create a company called "Rinker Industries" and only sell things to people named Rinker. There is nothing in the law that prevents me from doing this. It might even be a clever marketing scheme...

    In some situations, discrimination is mandated by law. You can't discriminate on the basis of age, right? Except for when you sell alcohol or tobacco. Then you can go to jail if you fail to discriminate on the basis of age.

    Discrimination on a personal level goes by the less inflammatory name "freedom of association" and is constitutionally protected. I can choose who I wish to associate with and who I do not wish to associate with.

    I believe you are thinking of illegal discrimination, the law prohibits specific kinds of discrimination in specific kinds of situations. Businesses may not discriminate on the basis of race in hiring, for example, but unless there is a specific law banning a specific type of discrimination in a specific situation, it is inherently legal.

    Now, if I was this lady, assuming she is a member of a protected minority class, I would research my genealogy to see how many people alive today had my name, and what their ethnic makeup was. If most people named "Babcock" were African-Americans, she'd end up practically owning the web site, as their filtering of her name would constitute illeagal discrimination in that case.
  • heh heh, check out today's Dilbe rt [dilbert.com].
  • I probably found this thread way too late, but what about this one? Dick Butkus - Football comentator

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close