bradtem wrote:Look, I have some experience with this. I was the subject of the first famous banning on the internet. I am at the EFF. There is rarely a need to totally disappear a thread without any mention of it. With respect, the normal procedure among psycho freedom of speech promoters when forced to remove stuff for legal reasons is to leave a stub, or to post a note about the reason for the takedown, so the community understands and learns from the reason, and more to the point they don't make the conclusion that the takedown was for some secret reason of the site host. Yes, a thread with a post that was replaced with "Post deleted because if violated the follow law" is a bit confusing, but it's much, much better than a completely vanished thread.
The two threads taken down, namely "Bumscrape the scalper tracker" and "Strategies for discouraging ticket sites" had lots of entirely permitted discussion in them. The former thread had been around for a long time too, so if the OP was in violation of the law it took a fair bit of time to have that be realized. I am trying to puzzle just what was illegal in those threads. There were some posts that proposed anti-scalper strategies which might be fraudulent, but those could have been easily excised if that was the issue, and there were not many of them.
bradtem wrote:Look, I have some experience with this. I was the subject of the first famous banning on the internet.
Savannah wrote:It sounds freaky & wrong, so you need to do it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests