Canadians vs. "Hateful" Website 23
We received the following: "Brad Fitzpatrick runs the freevote website with the help of a a few friends. It's simply a website where you can create a voting booth and take a poll about any subject you're interested in. Recently, some Canadian news sources have been creating quite a stir about his site, talking about how it violates hate crime legislation. Why? Because irresponsible people, specifically a group of canadian high schoolers in this case, have been logging onto his site and supposedly have been creating 'hateful' voting questions." Interesting definition of "hateful".
They have a point (Score:1)
As far as I'm concerned the website should be making a definite attempt to remove any such posts. Now I make no real attempt to hide my identity here, but there are things that I have posted and discussed here that would not make my boss very happy (aside fromt the fact that I post during the day when I'm at work *grin*).
Re:They have a point (Score:1)
The problem is worse than that. By posting the names of young children, particularly young girls, and asking the general public which girl is the best to rape, they are not only invading their privacy but also ripping away that's child's sense of security.
Those polls are an implicit threat of deeply personal violence.
Unfortunately, the only real solution is for the people running the site to monitor it closely.
Canadian Erosion of Free Speech (Score:3)
This makes me sick.
I don't like hateful material any more than anyone else, but seeing stuff like this makes me ashamed to be a Canadian.
Isn't it understood that when you limit freedom of speech only to that which you find acceptable, the speech is no longer free? This isn't such a tough concept.
Canadians' speech is free so long as they don't do anything that feels offensive to government officials. Hmmm...
Well, under those rules, Red China has free speech, too! Just make sure you only say nice things about the communist party.
I'd rather turn away from things that disgust me (like the KKK's recent success in joining Missouri's Adopt-a-Road program), rather than worrying about the steady erosion of my rights. Part of the cost of freedom is seeing and hearing things that may offend you.
And they want to go after the American who owns the website - for comments he didn't even post!
Once again, my country provides an international forum to embarrass me.
Jeez, as if being raped by Revenue Canada wasn't bad enough.
Anyone wanna hire a good, hard-working computer geek who yearns for the responsibility and pride of being an American citizen? Check out my user bio for more info.
Are you a Canadian? (Score:1)
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
Re:Canadian Erosion of Free Speech (Score:1)
The American Government is trying to pass a methamphetamine act (what ever happened to it?) in which case, it would be illegal to distribute any information about drugs, and link to any drug information websites. They have hidden this behind a clause that states something akin to "Providing information about the manufacture of methamphetamine and other drugs..."
The Canadian Government would never do anything like this. Canadians are generally the easiest going people.
At least in Canada, by law, I am permitted to say no to being subjected to embarrasing drug testing by my employees. Canadians have a plethora of rights.
Quite frankly, you're just being negative. Canadian society isn't perfect. But it's pretty fucking good.
I thought the US had all the puritins? (Score:1)
"Fitzpatrick also says no such problems with abuse of the service have been noted stateside."
Pundants and other blue-noses like to claim that exposure to things distasteful leads to desensitization and tolerance. I'm beginning to think that they have something there... But the trouble is that NON-exposure leads to over-sensitivity and intolerance. Canadians just need to expose themselves more.
A preemptive disclaimer... (Score:4)
We _do_ monitor the content.
There are many mechanisms running behind the scenes that screen the content based on sets of "bag" regexes and then flag booths. At any time, booths can be in the "Probably okay", "Probably bad", "Verified Good", or "Verified Bad" state, along with a date that the booth was set to that state last. There are then jobs working all the time scanning booths more and adjusting the states of booths that have changed since their last update.
FreeVote volunteers and employees then manually verify booths that are in the "probably bad" state and place them in either "Verified Bad" or "Verified Good".
In addition, visitors to the booths can rank the quality/content of the booth, and that raises more flags we look at.
There is a ton of moderation being done on the site, both automatic and by hand. More code has been written for our admin area than any other part of the site.
The real problem is the combination of:
a) people's immaturity
b) people's intolerance
I'm not sure either one is solvable.
My issue with Canada is that they're extremely intolerant. A bad booth will go up and immediately they start threatening lawsuits and calling my advertisers complaining, even if we shut it down within a day or so of its creation.
I don't start websites to make money --- I do them all for fun. I really hate having to deal with this crap because IANAL, I don't want to be a learn, don't want to pretend to be a lawyer, and just hate dealing with this stuff.
So depressing.
Canada, the vote, and the children (Score:1)
Most countries put children and minors into the same legal category as imbeciles and the insane, but Canada is much more aggressive about it and in the process, their parents are often in practice lumped in as well. Have you ever been to a supermarket in Canada and tried to buy caffeinated [landfield.com] Mountain Dew or caffeinated rootbeer? It doesn't exist, because children can't be trusted with caffeine and their parents might be too stupid to realize that non-cola sodas may contain caffeine.
Frankly, it astonished me at first, because Canada is more dedicated than most countries to conducting research [hrdc-drhc.gc.ca] into children's psychology: if we understand our children, then we can change the world! That sort of thing. But what's even more surprising is that a recent study [hrdc-drhc.gc.ca] ; demonstrated that in spite [hrdc-drhc.gc.ca] of how much effort and funding was being poured into Canadian schools and Canadian children's programs (from prenatal [hc-sc.gc.ca] and on), immigrant children still on average outperform native-born Canadian children. And that's in spite of the fact that Canada's immigrant children are in greater poverty and penury than their native counterparts; the education they received in foreign countries prior to arriving in Canada has helped them succeed where Canadian children without that opportunity languish.
I'm torn as to how to how to find a solution, of course. On the one hand, parents are proving insufficient, but at the same time, the government is proving incompetent to solve the problem. Clearly something has to be done, but who? The only choice I see is the UN, but they're usually unwilling (or not allowed) to get involved in purely domestic affairs, and you don't get any more domestic than child-rearing. But whatever Canada does, it must act soon. Certain industries (particularly the film industries [hollywoodnorthpr.com] in British Columbia) have been on the rise and have successfully drawn an international presence formerly reserved to the US. But if Jonny or Sally can't read, then when the children grow up to staff or lead those industries, the nation will find itself in a lot of trouble.
I only wish we in the US had something to offer in aid, but we've failed our children too. I suppose that ultimately, we'll have to rethink the legal status of children and perhaps move them into a more autonomous position and role, where they can think for themselves and make decisions in their own best interests, since obviously we can no longer trust ourselves to act in anyone's best interest but our own. First it was propertied white men [stormfront.org] who were enfranchised, and then came men of other races [washingtonpost.com], and then finally
Re:When it happens in Canada, they should fix it.. (Score:1)
Regards
When it happens in Canada, they should fix it... (Score:2)
Maybe they should just leave it alone. It doesn't happen to be in Canada, so I can't see how it is any of their business.
The fact that their kiddies had to leave the country to do this doesn't speak well of their free speech efforts.
If I leave the US and go to a country where laws are different, and I do something that is illegal here in the US but isn't there, I have broken no laws in the US and am not treated as a lawbreaker here (most of the time. I grant there are exceptions, dammit...). Maybe Canada is different?
the polls reflect scociety. (Score:1)
I found a poll, too! (Score:1)
I find this offensive!
Regards
Re:Canada, the vote, and the children (Score:1)
Um. Pardon?
In British Columbia you can buy caffinated colas, rootbeers, Mountain Dews (no one drinks that, tho) and other teeth-rotting products. Caffenated Barq's Rootbeer is even sold in my school.
Wormwood
Re:Canadian Erosion of Free Speech (Score:1)
Hateful Canadians (Score:1)
I hate hateful Canadians!...oh wait
Re:Canadian Erosion of Free Speech (Score:1)
In fact, if there's one thing Canadians pride themselves on, it's on not going the American way. I'm not saying that Americans are bad; your thinking just tends to be incompatible with our own.
Freedom Of Speech Works Both Ways (Score:1)
I'm a free speech absolutist -- if you can think it, you can say it.
However, just because you want to hide behind "free speech", doesn't mean everyone else has to shut up. Their free speech rights permit them to tell everyone -- including advertisers, clients, etc -- what this site has on it and why it should not be patronised.
The US 5th Amendment (or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) doesn't give you a free pass. If you dole it out, you've got to take it too.
Re:They have a point (Score:1)
It is unfortunate that people are abusing the website, and that's what this is really about. I guess authorities could get involved if a crime has been committed, but I'm not sure that one has. If so, great, arrest the people who are posting the full names of young children and asking explicit sexual questions. They may be minors, but hopefully something more than a slap on the wrist would be a deterant to others.
However, if no law has been broken, what else can be done? I think the parents of these children should have some responsibilty as to the actions of their children, but lets face it, they aren't going to sit and watch every minute their children are on the internet.
I would hate if this or other similar websites (slashdot) could be shut down because of the abuse of users, but honestly, what else can we do?
Re:Canadian Erosion of Free Speech (Score:2)
I'm quite proud to be Canadian and not American. At least if I was unemployed and had cancer, I wouldn't be left to die.
Part of the beauty of the American system of doing things is that it forces you to be productive.
However, the Canadian system attempts to spread the country's wealth among all citizens, not just those who have legitimately earned it.
I think this fits the definition of Communism pretty well; while Canada is not quite that bad, it's getting there.
Communism (and socialism) are great on paper, but they fail to address a fundamental human flaw: All people are lazy. Sure, some more so than others. But if you're going to give your people 50 rubles every day regardless of whether or not they bother to show up to work, how many people will actually show up to work?
The gross domestic product of the nation then collapses. Don't believe me? Take a look around Eastern Europe.
The economies where people have the most chance for personal success are also those where the perils of failure are the most devastating: United States, Hong Kong, etc.
Why is it we spend millions of dollars a year treating homeless heroin addicts who seldom contribute anything back to the economy in turn? Come on, people have to take some personal responsibility for their lives.
Here's a thought about socialized medicine. Since there's no great cost savings incentive to quit smoking or lose weight because OHIP (provincial HMO) will pay for all your medical expenses, how about we deny all coverage for lung cancer victims who have smoked since it was known that smoking was harmful? How about we make obese people who have heart attacks pay for their treatment? People who drive their cars without wearing their seatbelts should have to pay for the doctor to staple their skulls back together.
Then, you can legalize all those nasty things without worrying about the burden to the healthcare system, sit back, and watch Darwinian Theory take care of things.
Oh, I can't wait to see how many people send me back nasty responses... :) Stirring it up is sooo much fun.
Re:A preemptive disclaimer... (Score:2)
Moderate Up
Re:Canadian Erosion of Free Speech (Score:2)
You are either really naive or a complete moron, if you think Canada will not follow and declare drug information illegal too. Canada routinely mirrors Federal laws passed by FCC and other similar American organizations. This is a fact: Canada cannot think on its own, it has to do like Big (Bill) Brother does.
Exactly. Thank you.
If I at least had something besides misguided copycat policy to show for my contributions to the government's coffers, I might not feel so raped by the process.
With Canadian taxes, I'm paying for the Cadillac, but I'm getting a Cavalier.
Re:I thought the US had all the puritins? (Score:1)
Re:Canadian Erosion of Free Speech (Score:1)
Personally, I'm glad to know that in a time of crisis, my government will look out for me. I don't feel bad paying taxes to help homeless heroin addicts; I have no idea what their lives were like. They might be very troubled people, and if I was in their situation, I would certainly want to be helped.
As for cigarette smokers... do you know how much tax there is on a pack of cigarettes up here in Canada??? When I used to smoke (quit 18 months ago), it was something like 33%! Hell, by the time I developed lung cancer, I'd have paid for several people to undergo cancer treatment.
a note that you seem to ignore... just because the government will bail us out when we get ourselves in bad situations, it doesn't mean that we're all going to become obese, chain smoking alcoholic heroin bingers. we still have a sense of preservation (well, most of us).
i don't see canada progressing down a path of communism. we don't seem to be implementing any of the other tenets. i have no worries.