OT: New definition of hyperlinks, SPAM

[Corn]

Wow, I've got a legal issue too.

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: Corn
Wow, I've got a legal issue too.

You also have a gaping void where your brain should be.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Corn

The Discrimination is Black & White. They post links to Phone Company Webstores and E-Bay all over the place (Look with your own eyes)
but yet I can't?

Take note of the bolding in the above quote.

Now, ask yourself one simple question: Who pays for, and owns BBR. Is it you or "they"?

Another question or two; exactly how old are you anyway and why shouldn't your parents be flogged in public for raising such a selfish and ignorant child?

The very arguments being made here don't hold water. The people making the "They" decisions didn't pay for and don't "Own" BBR either.

 

[Corn]

If you feel you must carry out legal action against BBR, don't believe that the masses that supported you in your distributed computing fight will support you here.

HAH!!

This is the same idiot? Yet another example of this doofus' self-centered nature.

Here's a clue for you moron. While I was somewhat sympathetic in your previous legal fight, it was only because of the potential punishment you would have endured. You were clearly wrong last time in to use equipment in a way you had not had previous permission for.

It appears you haven't learned anything from that experience.

 

[blakeatwork]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I believe everything is on a slippery slope. Each small issue adds to an overall Chilling Effect.

Read History books under Communist Russia or Nazi Germany.

Christ man... just because you had legal problems in the past, does not mean you need to get your comeuppance against a privately run site... If Anand said he didn't want you to advertise through a signature on these forums, would you sue him, and rally the troops for a lynching???

Get over it... it's their site... don't try playing the sympathy card again.

 

[Corn]

You also have a gaping void where your brain should be.

[edit] Nevermind, you're just a worthless troll.

 

[Iwentsouth]

Stop spamming there forum with your stupid link retard.

 

[ThisIsMatt]

Wow.

at this thread and pretty much all the people posting in it.

 

[Jzero]

The very arguments being made here don't hold water. The people making the "They" decisions didn't pay for and don't "Own" BBR either.

I don't own my company, but I have the authority to make certain decisions regarding the enforcement of company policies. Just because you don't own a company doesn't mean you can't be authorized to act on the company's behalf.

You could just buck up and pay for the ad spot like the other companies.

 

[blakeatwork]

Originally posted by: Corn

Tell me why it is OK for them to have the link to a Phone Company Webstore but illegal for me? How is that frivilous? That's discrimination

Possibly because that link is paid advertising. Are you paying BBR for the privilage to advertise your wares on their website? I thought not.

I just want to know how this tool obtained elite status........

Because everyone felt sorry for him after the State of Georgia prosecuted him for using SETI on his work's computers...

This almost like playing the race card... it's quite sad what someone will do or say to have people remember he exists

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: ThisIsMatt
Wow.

at this thread and pretty much all the people posting in it.

And with that, the thread's GREATEST CONTRIBUTION, I'm off for work.

 

[Kev]

Now wouldn't it be funny if Anandtech Moderator deleted the link from his AT sig?

Due the the sensitive nature of many of our members that option isn't even being considered:

 

[SuperSix]

Sorry David, you're WAY off base here, I'm surprised you have taken this stance.

One forum removing a link that is in clear violation of their agreement = the end of the internet as we know it?

C'mon, you're kidding... right?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: blakeatwork

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I believe everything is on a slippery slope. Each small issue adds to an overall Chilling Effect.

Read History books under Communist Russia or Nazi Germany.

Christ man... just because you had legal problems in the past, does not mean you need to get your comeuppance against a privately run site... If Anand said he didn't want you to advertise through a signature on these forums, would you sue him, and rally the troops for a lynching???

Get over it... it's their site... don't try playing the sympathy card again.

I specifically asked if the sig was OK both here and at BBR and at both sites told me yes, it is OK. Now as a matter of making a law as they go along and selective prosecution someone changes their mind over there.

I have no issue with the PRIVATELY owned and run as some have implied.

It is also nothing to do with me either. Just equal access whether public or private.

 

[ndee]

what the h*ck is the problem dude? You wanna "sue" them or anything? You receive the

-of-the-day-award.

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Lord Evermore
Kinda funny that you also assume that every last one of us knows what site this is even at (I found it, but I had no idea before that dslreports.com is known as Broadband Reports). And that the first thing you think of when you see your sig deleted is "lawsuit"!

Where's a post with an ad from another company? I don't have any idea how the forums are run there, and the layout is horrid.

No matter what though, there's no "legal battle" here. They are entirely within their rights to delete everything you post just because they don't like you, if that's what they decide, and if they want to let someone else post a commercial link, then they can do that too. It's their site, and the site rules state they can delete your posts. I take that to mean they can also delete part of a post if they feel that part needs to be deleted, so long as the deletion isn't intended to corrupt the meaning and intent of the post, since that could legally cause some problems. Removing the content of a signature is included in my take on that rule, as well.

If you have a problem with the way they run their site, then your only recourse is to attempt to contact them and discuss it, and if you want, tell other people about the problem in an attempt to dissuade them from using the site or get them to try contacting the site to make changes to the way it's run.

This is not a discrimination issue. They aren't excluding you due to any "class" or "group" that you belong to. They are telling you that something you did isn't acceptable to them, and you may not take that action again using THEIR services. Whether they apply it to you only doesn't make it discrimination. They're perfectly free to say they just don't like you and are going to randomly make rules for you about what you're allowed to post. It's their site.

Even if you wanted to call it discrimination, what are they discriminating against? The group of people who want to post links to other sites? Since when is that a legally protected minority?

Oh, and nobody said it was illegal for you to post a link. Technically, it may not even be against their rules. But their rules also say they can remove it for no reason at all. At least they gave you a reason, even if you don't agree. You don't have anything to fight them with here.

>Whether they apply it to you only doesn't make it discrimination.<

You have got to be kidding me. Too bad you are not Japanese living here just after Pearl Harbor and rounded up like a Cow.

The Discrimination is Black & White. They post links to Phone Company Webstores and E-Bay all over the place (Look with your own eyes)
but yet I can't?

The more posts I read, the more I think you might be joking.

I'm lost for words after reading the whole thread, you are one weird (M)cOw(en).

 

[blakeatwork]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: blakeatwork

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I believe everything is on a slippery slope. Each small issue adds to an overall Chilling Effect.

Read History books under Communist Russia or Nazi Germany.

Christ man... just because you had legal problems in the past, does not mean you need to get your comeuppance against a privately run site... If Anand said he didn't want you to advertise through a signature on these forums, would you sue him, and rally the troops for a lynching???

Get over it... it's their site... don't try playing the sympathy card again.

I specifically asked if the sig was OK both here and at BBR and at both sites told me yes, it is OK. Now as a matter of making a law as they go along and selective prosecution someone changes their mind over there.

I have no issue with the PRIVATELY owned and run as some have implied.

It is also nothing to do with me either. Just equal access whether public or private.

And what if Terms of Service change and Anand decides that he doesn't want ANY commercial advertising that isn't paid for??? Are you going to scream RAPE!! or that the Sky is Falling!!?? You can't keep trying to capitalize on your "fame" and expect most members here to go along with it.. I admired your stance in the SETI case, but this is just a blatant attempt to get everyone to look at you again.

As has been said, deal with it... they've decided they DON'T want to give out free advertising... it's their choice.

 

[Corn]

You wanna "sue" them or anything?

Of course he want's to sue them. This is Dave's MO. He believes its his "right" to use someone else's equipment in any manner he see's fit, no matter if they want it used for his purposes or not.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Jzero

The very arguments being made here don't hold water. The people making the "They" decisions didn't pay for and don't "Own" BBR either.

I don't own my company, but I have the authority to make certain decisions regarding the enforcement of company policies. Just because you don't own a company doesn't mean you can't be authorized to act on the company's behalf.

You could just buck up and pay for the ad spot like the other companies.

I have sent E-mails requesting info to post PAID advertising as well. No response. Again arguments not holding water.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Corn

If you feel you must carry out legal action against BBR, don't believe that the masses that supported you in your distributed computing fight will support you here.

HAH!!

This is the same idiot? Yet another example of this doofus' self-centered nature.

Here's a clue for you moron. While I was somewhat sympathetic in your previous legal fight, it was only because of the potential punishment you would have endured. You were clearly wrong last time in to use equipment in a way you had not had previous permission for.

It appears you haven't learned anything from that experience.

Did you read? I asked for and received permission.

 

[Corn]

Did you read? I asked for and received permission.

I didn't claim you didn't have "permission" this time around. The problem is that someone changed their mind about your "permission"--something they have every right to do. It's one thing to be upset that you cannot get free advertising any longer on their website. It's another thing altogether to believe that you have some legal recourse.

Your free ride is over at BBR, get over it already.

 

[Lord Evermore]

Just because they don't answer your emails doesn't mean you've got some sort of discrimination suit against them, or breach of contract, or anything else you can possibly think of. Nobody said they have to respond to you, just like they don't have to answer a phone call if they don't want to. You aren't paying them for any services, and whether you want to pay them or not, they don't seem to be all that concerned with you.

Of course, it HAS only been one day. Just because you run on Internet time doesn't mean everyone else does, or that there's nobody else more important than you that they'd prefer to deal with first.

 

[Jzero]

I have sent E-mails requesting info to post PAID advertising as well. No response. Again arguments not holding water.

The argument holds water based on the information you presented, which did not include you asking to pay for legit advertising space

I asked for and received permission.

And that permission was either A) revoked or B) someone screwed.

Either way, I still don't see how this is a "Legal Internet Emergency" or how it threatens the very existence of links, or a case of discrimination, or the rise of the Third Riech to power over the Internet.

I can see why you might be annoyed, but all these drama queen antics don't support your already tenuous argument. You asked for a clarification as to why they removed your link. They don't have to give you one and they didn't.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Lord Evermore
Just because they don't answer your emails doesn't mean you've got some sort of discrimination suit against them, or breach of contract, or anything else you can possibly think of. Nobody said they have to respond to you, just like they don't have to answer a phone call if they don't want to. You aren't paying them for any services, and whether you want to pay them or not, they don't seem to be all that concerned with you.

Of course, it HAS only been one day. Just because you run on Internet time doesn't mean everyone else does, or that there's nobody else more important than you that they'd prefer to deal with first.

I E-mailed them nearly a month ago. What time is that?

>they don't seem to be all that concerned with you.

That may very well be, just as the Phone Companies and Industry doesn't care about the Consumer and Open Market system.

From their Terms Of Service:

>The dslreports.com Message Boards are designed to help readers obtain DSL ISP information discuss ways to make ISP choices.

Clearly not a true statement.

 

[Jzero]

>The dslreports.com Message Boards are designed to help readers obtain DSL ISP information discuss ways to make ISP choices.

Clearly not a true statement.

What does you flogging cheap modems have to do with readers getting information about ISPs?