SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
http://torrentfreak.com/rise-up-against-govt-anti-piracy-plans-isp-urges-140610/
The ISP iiNet has rejected plans to introduce three-strikes and site blocking to combat piracy and have urged citizens to pressure the government and fight back against the "foreign interests" attempting to dictate Australian policy.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
ISP Urges Citizens to Pressure Government against "Foreign Interests"
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 13 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
There's coffee in that nebula!
-- Capt. Kathryn Janeway, Star Trek: Voyager, "The Cloud"
(Score: 0, Troll) by tangomargarine on Tuesday June 10 2014, @03:32PM
It's a U.S. site, hosted in the U.S., probably by U.S. citizens, targetted at a U.S. readership. How the fuck more clear do you need?
I'm well aware the rest of the world exists. You don't need to remind me every 5 minutes. And I'll continue assuming that unless stated otherwise articles are talking about the U.S., because the vast majority of the time *it works.*
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 4, Interesting) by caffeinated bacon on Tuesday June 10 2014, @04:12PM
That's all fine, just realise that the rest of the time *it doesn't*
It's perfectly clear to me, but then I'm not the one making incorrect assumptions and then blaming someone else for being wrong.
It's also quite common to try and trick you into reading an article you may otherwise not be interested in. If it mentioned Australia right at the start you may not have bothered to read it. Seems like they won this round.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday June 11 2014, @12:38AM
Really? Really-really?
No, seriously, if it is so, I'll go somewhere else: I'm not in the target readership.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday June 11 2014, @02:41PM
You can be targeted at a demographic without excluding others. For example, Soylent is not published in German, yet we're not discriminating against German people. Soylent is not a gay advocacy cite, yet we (try) not to discriminate against gay people. Soylent is not published in Braille (that I know of) yet I'm sure we don't hate blind people.
Apparently me pointing out this obvious fact warrants two "-1, Flamebait/Troll" mods, though. I really don't get it. We talk about U.S. politics. We talk about tech companies based in/from the U.S. (Ubuntu being an exception). We talk about U.S. patent and copyright cases. When we talk about the world, it's usually focused on how it affects the U.S., although admittedly that may be because the U.S. has fucked with most the world already so it's kind of hard to avoid the topic.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday June 11 2014, @04:28PM
Do read your post again. Even if you didn't intend to, you expressed "exclusion" quite vehemently. You hinted an "aggressive territorial behaviour" (that's my lawn, with US grass, fuckigly maintained by US citizens, you do as I say because it works this way most of the time; I don't want to change that) and did nothing to counterbalance it.
No, don't assume there's an "implicit" meaning that doesn't need to be mentioned, especially if you want to think of yourself as "inclusive" - this world is culturally diverse enough to "lose in translation" some parts that were explicitly said. much higher risk for the parts you didn't.
Do you think something on the line of: "Guys, please, do mention the country where it happens. Help me avoid crushed hopes and disappointment when I discover it hasn't happened in US, where the majority of SN readership is" would have resulted in the same troll modding?
My perspective: we are speaking about what happens in the world (and it's indeed a pity US has lately such a bad influence, it used to be better only about 15-20 years ago). True, while discussing about what happens in the world, it's natural and acceptable for each of the contributors (as opposed to readers-only) to evaluate the impact of those happenings on their own countries - that is the reason you will see the majority of the comments being US centric, and not because SN is US turf.
(part of my reason for joining SN - probably some days before you - was because /. was for me, a non-US resident, too aggressively US centric; I hoped SN will be less radicalized. If it doesn't happen as I hoped, well... SN is not the only place I can get my daily dose of news/comments)
You see, we also talk about UK considering drugs and prostitution as part of GDP.
We also talk about the best view on a blackhole [soylentnews.org] (no, it's not about US deficit).
Heck, here's [soylentnews.org] a story about how driving 2 hours/day correlates with heath problems - TFS says nothing about the country: you think is US? Just browse TFA and you'll discover (in methodology section) that the research was conducted in Australia and the study cohort was selected from Australia's population.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday June 11 2014, @05:01PM
It sounds like we're arguing over idealistic vs pragmatic definitions of demographic. I've tried to spell out down to the letter why I consider Slashdot and Soylent U.S. sites, based on my observations that that's how they function. You're saying they're not U.S. sites per se because they don't explicitly declare themselves as such anywhere (which, AFAIK, is true).
I was trying to head off the inevitable posters who feel compelled to point at other countries whenever someone makes the reasonable assumption the article is talking about the U.S., with my initial comment about SD/SN being largely U.S.-centric. Maybe I should have done it slightly more diplomatically as you say, but it seems rather silly to me to have to apologize for my pragmatically-observed viewpoint. I'm apologizing for reality? I don't control what the SN editors post as stories.
I still haven't been convinced that we're actually in disagreement other than you taking offense at me calling a spade a spade (presumably because you think we should have no need to make such distinctions). But I'm putting a lot of words in your mouth so I'll just stop.
I suppose I could just avoid all this drama by letting people call me ignorant every time I post. That someone feels the need to call me such does not make it true. Because we all enjoy reading the same posts over and over, right?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"