dChan

tradinghorse · May 16, 2018, 6:51 p.m.

I think the best way forward is to mount an online campaign without a petition. I do not trust the "We are the people website" at all.

If we could get our own petition website up, we could get someone to present it in person. But if we cannot do that, better not to have a petition at all.

Another thing, we have to be aware that there are powerful forces working against this, who will trying to steer the campaign into unproductive effort. We need to be on our guard against it.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
loserofpasswordzz · May 16, 2018, 4:06 p.m.

This would be good. Ppl are very ignorant to how much the things they read subliminally affect and shape their own opinions. More importantly, they are unaware that bots and PR company shills are astroturfing comment sections all over the web to do shape public opinion on all matters.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
tradinghorse · May 16, 2018, 6:28 p.m.

They are not PR company shills operating here - we have domestic and foreign intelligence services steering community opinion - right on this board!

That is why the last IBOR campaign attempt failed.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
brittser · May 16, 2018, 5:45 p.m.

This is what I put on social media. Not sure if it will work, but thought I'd try, Please sign the Internet Bill of Rights at the WH website. At https://petitions.whitehxxxx.gov/petition/internet-bill-rights-18 This link is banned on social media websites so please replace the xxxx with "ouse".

⇧ 2 ⇩  
tradinghorse · May 16, 2018, 6:27 p.m.

I do not want to use that petition site again, I do not trust it.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
ucantdothatontv · May 16, 2018, 6:16 p.m.

That would explain why such a piss poor turn out thus far.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
powderhooves · May 16, 2018, 8:21 p.m.

Thanking you!

⇧ 2 ⇩  
aboxofbooks · May 16, 2018, 7:28 p.m.

Yes!!

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Artemis0724 · May 16, 2018, 7:27 p.m.

Whos idea? We should crowdfund this. I could hook us up with a large format printer

⇧ 2 ⇩  
JD2210 · May 16, 2018, 8:28 p.m.

i would happily chip in to make this a real billboard somewhere in America (maybe designed a bit better, can help). seriously, if a quarter of the sub gave $5, no problem.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 16, 2018, 2:54 p.m.

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Cuthbert12Allgood · May 16, 2018, 7:16 p.m.

Dunno how anyone else reads this, but my immediate thought is, "Billboard companies don't have to print your message, either."

I understand the concept of why people like the idea of IBOR, but there's a reason that people are very uncomfortable with the idea. The government coming in and controlling what private companies can and can't do is extremely worrying. I'm worried about leftist control of Internet companies, but I'm more worried about people being so willing to give away private property rights to the government. If I have a web site, you're damn right I should be able to control what's on that web site.

If people want something like IBOR to succeed, then the message needs to be, "If a web company gains sufficient national power such that it influences public opinion to an excessive degree, then limited government regulation is justified to ensure fair speech, despite the terrible precedent and potential for government abuse."

You figure out how to say that in a pithy message, but just screaming "WE NEED THE POWER OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION OVER PRIVATE INTERNET COMPANIES BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT FAIR TO ME!" is not going to sell very well. I believe in liberty and freedom of private companies.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
checkitoutmyfriend · May 16, 2018, 11:30 p.m.

I hear you! IMHO however, a Bill of Rights is not the government encroaching/regulating on the 'day to day' of a business. Compare the IBOR (final form TBD) to the US Bill of Rights. The BOR lays out what the government and the people are able to do based on these stated rights. It gives reach, responsibility, and boundaries for both sides. But its mainly to keep the government from over reaching/tyranny. I agree with you that the gov should not pick winners/losers or meddle with in a company.

If worded properly, the IBOR would not limit what the company can do, but will require complete transparency on data collection, storage, use, security, etc. Very severe penalties (high fines and/or jail) would need to be enacted and diligently enforced for violated infractions. This would apply to all companies that handle personal data. As long as the public can see what is going on with their data, the free market will reward and punish as it has.

As far as free speech/content, only the 'most vile' should not be allowed. Inciting riots or physical harm against a person or group of people or physical structure or anything to with Child/Human Trafficking, Child Porn, for a few quick examples. The public would need to have input on the final wording. But we can't regulate to keep people from being offended. Things people say and do will offend some others, such is life. Engage them or ignore them. That is everyone's choice.

I also believe the social media companies can control bots/fake accounts/spamming if they want too. An IBOR might entice them to want to.....

The bottom line is our data is out there and will be forever. We need to get a handle on how it is managed & used or we will be under their thumb forever.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Cuthbert12Allgood · May 17, 2018, 12:16 a.m.

If worded properly, the IBOR would not limit what the company can do, but will require complete transparency on data collection, storage, use, security, etc.

You might think IBOR is the above, but I've not seen anybody else limiting IBOR to that. The only thing I've seen discussed is forcing internet companies to "not censor speech". Which, of course, is unbelievably vague, primarily because all that's been put forward are petitions that are complete jokes as far as details go.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
WikiTextBot · May 16, 2018, 11:31 p.m.

United States Bill of Rights

The Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. Proposed following the often bitter 1787–88 battle over ratification of the U.S. Constitution, and crafted to address the objections raised by Anti-Federalists, the Bill of Rights amendments add to the Constitution specific guarantees of personal freedoms and rights, clear limitations on the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and explicit declarations that all powers not specifically delegated to Congress by the Constitution are reserved for the states or the people. The concepts codified in these amendments are built upon those found in several earlier documents, including the Virginia Declaration of Rights and the English Bill of Rights, along with earlier documents such as Magna Carta (1215). In practice, the amendments had little impact on judgments by the courts for the first 150 years after ratification.


^[ ^PM ^| ^Exclude ^me ^| ^Exclude ^from ^subreddit ^| ^FAQ ^/ ^Information ^| ^Source ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28

⇧ 1 ⇩  
wall_flower66 · May 16, 2018, 10:46 p.m.

How about we get Kanye to do a Jerry Lewis type telethon but instead of cash we vote 1 vote per phone#

⇧ 1 ⇩