Arizona Wants to Outlaw Trolling by Banning 'Annoying' Comments

46

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

TrollBot5000

I know this article is on page 4 and noones reading it but I did post a comment under my main account just expressing my views on maybe a broader scope in relation to the fascist subject of this article via the lyrics to Metallica's "And Justice For All" Now Im quite certain that it wasn't any longer than some of the long winded rants you see on here. It certainly wasn't offensive so it was removed why?? I dunno man Just from looking at the recent articles from the stand point of how late maxpc always is on tech news I wonder why I still even bother with this site. All of the posts with any relevance at all have already been posted on the register or any other site the adults go to in lieu of this mcdonald's playland of tech.

avatar

spokenwordd

This is the worst idea ever... As much as I hate trolls this is just going to make things worse. Who gets to say what is "annoying"? Who sets the standard for "offended"? Government has no business policing this in a free society. How about leaving that to site owners?

We are a nation of both conflicting and complimentary values. Someone is bound to get offended, grow some skin and get over it.

avatar

TechLarry

Gotta be spearheaded by a Liberal.

avatar

szore

Why is the government trying to silence its citizens?

If someone says something offensive, ignore them.

Maybe these politicians should be rounded up and executed.

There I said it, throw me in jail.

And NO you CAN'T have my guns.

avatar

TheOx24

looks like someone has been trolled too hard

avatar

Nimrod

Totally unconstitutional. They have no authority to do this nor do they posses the power to enforce it.

The right to anon posting has been around and held sacred since even before July 4th, 1776. Freedom of speech is designed to protect unpopular speech, not the upselly gum drops and lollypop bullshit.

avatar

DFSolley

From the refered article, it seems not applicable to group chatting/commenting, but to more private areas such as personal e-mail or facebook page.

avatar

tekknyne

Make trolling illegal? Darnit, I guess I need to find a new day-job.

avatar

Freebackrubs

What is with Arizona? First I hear something about them warrantlessly tracking and intercepting people's cell phone and now this? How do you plan on monitoring this, Arizona? Are you going to clone my computer too and sift through every dumb comment I EVERY post- ANYWHERE? That would just give me the incentive to troll harder... make your life a living hell.

All trolling aside, Arizona, I prefer my Freedom over your 'Protection' but thanks anyways.

avatar

dstevens

Wouldn't a bill like that violate my constitutional rights as an american citizen to say whatever the duck I want to say?

avatar

dstevens

Wouldn't a bill like that violate my constitutional rights as an american citizen to say whatever the duck I want to say?

avatar

jgrimoldy

This is not exactly smaller government, now is it?

avatar

I Jedi

If you think the word republican still associated with small government, you should take a look at least what the republican party has turned into since the Vietnam war.

avatar

tekknyne

I love how simple ppl think small government good, big government bad. Hey lets just get a government that doesn't suck and start from there. Who cares if it's big or little.

avatar

anusbreath

Who cares if it's big or little? Government costs money, and a bigger one costs more than a smaller one. Money out of your pocket, or maybe you're so poor you don't pay any taxes. I pay $30,000 a year in Federal Taxes, and I'd much rather pay less thanks. Maybe you don't mind the extra trillion the government borrows every year since Obama YoMama got in office. Let's get him re-elected and see if we can go bankrupt. Whoo hoo.

avatar

Nimrod

Are you retarded or something? lol. Yeah you do that, well wait here. How long do you think it will take? Fucking idiot.

avatar

dstevens

RON PAL!! RON PAUL!!!

avatar

lunchbox73

No! Gary Johnson!

www.lp.org

avatar

darkstorm977

somebody is going to get trolled real bad, that or Arizona got trolled with this troll lmfaoooo

avatar

iheartpcs

Rep. Vic Williams must have gotten owned on a message board lol.

avatar

Morete

A long time ago in a land far, far away, there were free men.

avatar

lhatten

I have 2 words for you. Supreme Court! Know way this will pass muster.

avatar

compro01

Great. That'll only take 3 years or so to wind through 4 or so levels of courts. Hope you've got a suitcase full of cash to pay the lawyer for all that time.

avatar

Biceps

I have a few questions. If trolling is to be illegal in Arizona, how do they plan to enforce this outside of Arizona? I mean, if I know someone in Arizona and - from outside that state - post lots of 'annoying' things on their Facebook page, am I in violation of the law? If so, then is Arizona going to send the State of California a request to arrest and extridite me? What if the poster is in Canada? Who does this apply to? Everyone, or just people dumb enough to still be living in Arizona? Is Arizona going to become the internet police for the entire country?

I think it is safe to say that this bill is extremely poorly conceived, unenforcable outside of Arizona, and absolutely designed from the ground up to be a tool to suppress free speech. You would have to be an idiot republican from Arizona to think otherwise ;)

avatar

bling581

So who determines what comments would be considered "trolling"? What offends one person may be perfectly fine to others. There's no way they could enforce this.

avatar

Typo91

Imagine this...

You are in Jail, guy next to you says...

I am in here for hitting a guy with my car while drunk...

Other guy says

Yea, I stabbed my ex-wife with a plastic fork, 37 times

Other guy says

Yea I got caught stealing millions of dollars from my company

They all turn do you, "so what are you in for", you reply,

I hit the Dislike button when someone posted on facebook an article about helping breast cancer. It was my 3rd strike...

avatar

Happy

...and the constitution gets raped again...

avatar

I Jedi

If you really want to see the nanny state we're becoming, see the movie Cyberbu//y. I laughed throughout the entire thing, and finally realized that the theme of the movie was that this is how real life is and laughed some more.

avatar

Nimrod

The new Hunger Games movie has it about right. Or maybe the movie Idiocracy.

avatar

chipmunkofdoom2

Really? There's NOTHING else that our faithful public servants could be doing than trying to play Internet cop? Yeah, it's deplorable, but it's also freedom of speech. They say they only are going to focus on the really extreme stuff, but they don't even read the bills they write.. how do they know what they're voting on?

I'm not anti-government, but this is how you take something away from someone, slowly and bit by bit. If you start stifling all freedom of speech, people will notice. If you instead start with internet forums and chats, people then won't think it's too bad.. hey, they're stopping senseless arguments on the internet and cyber bullying, that's a good thing right? Well, maybe.. the problem is once everyone is used to the government saying what we can and can't type on a forum, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to extend that to blogs.. then to extend that to news print, then to TV commentary, then it's all illegal.

In fact, this whole post would be illegal under this bill.. and if we can't call these stick up their ass do-nothing politicians out on their asinine behavior, what kind of country would we live in?

avatar

Zoandar

The residents of Arizona, legislators included, seem to be notorious for coming up with wacky ideas and laws. Hopefully those with the power to veto such a suggestion will have a more logical mind and prevent yet another cause for our already overloaded frivolous lawsuit handling legal system. Has anyone uncovered what the resulting sentencing would be if a person broke this proposed law? Perhaps more interesting is that such a law could only be effectively enforced if all providers of electronic communication were made to rat out the names and locations of their constituent members when one is accused. Which means more cyberpolice action ala federal takedowns of web servers. What's this country coming to? One may say this law isn't intended to stifle freedom of speech, but it cannot work any other way. So it seems that really is the true underlying intent.

Sounds like something cooked up in Cupertino.

avatar

I Jedi

What exactly does this bill define annoying or offensive to be? Would posting dead pictures of babies online be considered offensive, or would it be something more subtle like a post about how various religions are stupid according to said poster? If there is no definition in the bill about what annoying or offensive means, then it can apply to anything that the state and law enforcement or anyone wants it to mean in the state of Arizona. This is a waste of time and a waste of resources. It's either meant to bring awareness to something else, or simply show that republicans look like they're trying to settle social problems that occur online, so that even if the bill fails, they can say they tried.

The issue of cyber bullying, annoying post, etc, will never be settled because the Internet isn't setup in such a way that everyone can be so easily tracked. I could go to my local library, go online, use a few proxy servers to better conceal my location, and post a bunch of obscene pictures to a religious forum and never get caught. The only way to make it easy to make accountability for one's actions online is to have an ID associated with every person online, which would associate every alias, forum, site they visit to their ID. If that doesn't scream privacy issues out the ass and ACLU going over 9000 to stop such an ID system, I don't know what will.

The more I think about it, the more I feel this bill is just political posturing, or idiots who really think they can monitor and stop "offensive" and "annoying" things people do online. I've got news for everyone. The local admins of a site or the host of a site should be the one's to have a final word on what is and isn't offensive or annoying. It's their domain and property, and so they should be the one's responsible for what content they wish to allow and not allow.

avatar

germanogre

Jesus, why can't people just TOUGHEN UP a bit?! It seems the first thing people do when a post/comment hurts their feelings is contacting either police or their lawyer. The Ban Hammer seems perfectly adequate to me.

avatar

Captain_Steve

I feel it's a problem of the Myspace/Facebook generation. Us ancient ones who have been online since back in the day (I'm still working off of my 45 million free minutes of AOL) kept our real life from our online life seperate. Who we were online had no weight on who we were offline. Hell; I still don't use my real name or post pictures of myself online.

The new generation though seems to use the internet as an extension of themselves in real life; so anytime something happens to them online, they feel it's happening to them in real life; they never built up the wall between online life and real life, they put their real ife online.

Maybe if they had gotten eaten by a Grue a few times they would have learned to live with it.

avatar

TechLarry

No kidding. There seems to be a skin shortage at the human manufacturing plant. Maybe it was moved to China and the quality has gone down like everything else.

avatar

Zoandar

Very good point! And as the growing push to embrace "cloud computing" continues, more and more of the younger generation are going to have the majority of the minutia of their lives residing on some server somewhere which out of total ignorance of the dangers in the real world they believe to be "safe". I can't see this ever "ending well" for them. Social networking seems to me to be a giant carrot dangling in front of the donkeys of today's society. Has anyone ever turned around and looked back to see just who is riding in the cart they are pulling to reach that elusive carrot?

avatar

Wareagle

Problem?

avatar

stradric

It's no surprise that the bill's sponsor is a Republican. These are people that like to believe their own version of the truth and don't want anyone to burst their little bubbles of ignorance. e.g. Evolution is just a theory. The universe is only 6000 years old. Jesus existed and was a white American guy who loved war. Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and bombed us on 9/11. etc. etc.

I'm willing to bet the sponsor, Tim Vogt, or this Vic Williams guy was once the target of ire on the internet for spouting something stupid. And now they're out to criminalize those who offended their delicate world view.

Ignorant morons, the likes you will find dominating the Republican party these days, are deserving of ridicule. This bill would protect them and allow them to maintain their bubbles of ignorance. It's frankly quite disgusting. The level of cowardice is exceedingly high here -- especially for politicians that love to bitch about "the nanny state." This is like saying "I can't handle myself in an argument, so I need to criminalize your speech."

avatar

Nimrod

If you didnt pipe up about illegal TSA searches, the schools lying and saying that vaccines are required by law or the 60billion spent on military surveillance of private citizens then you should prolly just STFU now to.

avatar

tehLazyNinja

"Jesus existed and was a white American guy who loved war" Nobody says that. Jesus had nothing to do with nations, he was only concerned with individuals so much of his teachings did not have any application to a nation wishing to maintain its sovereignty.

Nobody suggested that Saddam attacked the US on 9/11 either. The WMD thing, while he was not caught red-handed, much evidence was found that they did exist and were used. One of Saddam's generals (Georges Sada) wrote a book that discussed (among other topics) how they packed old airplanes and shipped the weapons out of the country in advance of the US invasion, which is why you should never announce that sort of thing.

Most straw men I can let go but I felt compelled to address these.

As for the rest, depends on where you put your faith. Either you believe in natural processes or you believe in the one who created them.

avatar

Captain_Steve

I love this post specifically because it outlines why the bill doesn't work. When the opening line is "It's no surprise that the bill's sponser is a Republican," I don't know if he's joking (trolling as the internet calls it), being dead serious as a personal belief, or if he's mis-infomed. I don't mean to be insulting; the exact same three options apply to any and all personal opinions being stated.

This is why the ban-hammer is more important that criminal prosacution. It enforces the standards of the social enviroment on the web-site without having to first decide why the comment was made. Once the law becomes involve, then we have to decide what the intent of the comment made was.

Once again; I don't mean to be insulting by using that line as an example; it was just perfect for the topic, and I apologize if any offense was taken.

avatar

praack

actually this type of stupidity spans both parties Stradic - so don't get your pre-election I HATE REPUBLICANS pin out quite yet.

and yes this one is bipartisan

we really need to be more active as citizens to keep all of our elected officials up to date as to what is needed, fair and abiding to the Constitution and bill of rights

Most of these guys go weeks sometimes months without a letter from a Constituent other than Grandma - so what do you expect?

avatar

spaceporker

Love it!

avatar

compro01

Did something get into the water or is it just the heat causing all this insanity in Arizona?

avatar

tehLazyNinja

I really hope we don't overreact to trolls. I'm for banning them, but we have to allow for debate and differing views so long as there is an honest discussion.

What I think will happen is this: anyone who wants to start a discussion will get banned, meaning that a certain belief will be inadvertently (or not) promoted exclusively because no one has the chance to disagree.

avatar

HiGHRoLLeR038

FIRST lololololololol

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.