Jump to content

16 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: Thailand
Timeline
Posted

In case you're wondering as you read this article, here's the relevant bit from the VJ TOS:

However, Visajourney.com reserves the right at all times to disclose any information as necessary to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request

Watch what you say on VJ ... Ewok is reporting every word to the NSA, FBI and the WIGSS (Wookie Intergalactic Snitch Squad)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-...0,7539146.story

Anonymity is no guarantee in online postings

News organizations, courts finding ways to subpoena people who post defamatory comments in online forums

By Georgia Garvey and William Lee, Tribune reporters

February 14, 2010

Jeff Camacho uses an online handle when he spouts off about five times a day on the comment boards of newspaper Web sites. But the computer repairman realizes one of the often-overlooked truths of posting: His identity is easily uncovered.

"As long as the newspaper is not selling my information to marketers, I really don't care," said Camacho, 45, of Cary. "A lot of people think they're anonymous online. You're really not."

Write something threatening or defamatory and the mask of anonymity can be removed. It's technologically simple to track the source of a comment; the more difficult question is when it should be done.

Policies vary as much as the Web sites that create them, and when site operators do reveal the identity of anonymous commenters, they balance values such as free speech, public safety and the ability to foster an online community.

"If people … are afraid that some editor is going to look behind the administrative interface, then (they) won't come and talk on the site, and they certainly won't be as willing to talk about controversial topics," said David Ardia, director of Harvard Law School's Citizen Media Law Project.

Often, though, courts can force the unveiling. If subpoenaed, most Web operators can produce a poster's IP, or Internet protocol, address, which usually can be traced back to an Internet provider or commenter.

In a typical scenario, someone makes a comment alleged to be defamatory. That's what happened when Lisa Stone, a Buffalo Grove village trustee, took offense to a posting on a Daily Herald site by someone calling himself "Hipcheck16."

The comment, made to Stone's 15-year-old son, insinuated the teen made a habit of inviting strange men to his home.

"Or do they usually invite you to their house?" Hipcheck16 added.

An appalled Stone sought the writer's identity in court, and a judge ruled in November that she should be told the commenter's name. The poster's attorney has appealed. Stone said she believes the man, identified as "John Doe" in court documents, would never have made the comments to her son's face.

"I would say that he was very confident that (his identity) couldn't be discovered," Stone said.

While complying with subpoenas isn't unusual, some argue the ease with which an ID can be acquired should be made clearer to those using comment boards.

News organizations everywhere are untangling these issues. Decisions at the Tribune are made individually, said Karen Flax, assistant general counsel for the Tribune Company. She said that, even under subpoena, the company will try to inform a commenter before releasing information about him or her, something the Tribune's Terms of Service permits.

Flax says the Tribune has been subpoenaed more than once for information about anonymous posters, including civil cases where people felt they had been defamed and criminal cases where someone may have witnessed a crime.

"We would always try to give time to let the poster go (to court) and quash" the subpoena, Flax said. There may also be instances where the news organization determines the commenter was acting as a news source and the company could elect to fight to protect the person's privacy, she said.

Add to the complicated stew of issues an Internet culture of free-wheeling commentary, and the results can be unpredictable.

"There are purists who think the Internet is a fundamentally different medium and that the old rules — that is, vetting letters to the editor — should not be applied to comments," says Jim Hopkins, a former reporter based in San Francisco who runs several media blogs. "I've been hit with the same criticism. If you limit these comments in any way, (critics say) you're engaging in censorship."

Those judged guilty of violating a poster's privacy can be sentenced to serious digital scorn. A good example is Kurt Greenbaum, an editor at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch who tipped off the employer of an anonymous commenter who posted an offensive statement on the paper's Web site.

Greenbaum posted a question last November on a blog on the Post-Dispatch site asking, "What's the craziest thing you've ever eaten?" One commenter, according to a post Greenbaum later wrote, replied with a vulgarity. Greenbaum reported he deleted the post, but it popped up again from the same user.

This time he used the Internet protocol address to contact the place where the comment originated, a school. Officials tracked down the poster, an employee, and confronted him. The man resigned, Greenbaum reported in a blog post titled: "Post a vulgar comment while you're at work, lose your job."

Hundreds of comments excoriating Greenbaum were posted on the newspaper's site — as well as on Greenbaum's personal blog posts on the topic.

Greenbaum declined to comment for this story, but Bob Rose, deputy managing editor of online and production for the Post-Dispatch, said the paper even considered calling police at one point after the "volume and intensity" of the criticism reached a fever pitch.

"Did I overreact?" asked Greenbaum in a later post. "Maybe I did. I am constantly frustrated by the difficulty of dealing with this kind of language."

Although some lament civility's demise online, Chris Tolles holds a more liberal view. Tolles is CEO of Topix.com, which he said posts between 120,000 and 150,000 comments a day.

"Enabling people to say what they will," he said, "makes for a better society in the long run, because it means people have to have a thicker skin (and) it means a lot of things come out that wouldn't have come out."

Ultimately, Camacho, the frequent poster from Cary, knows some may not like what he writes. Camacho, who asked not to be identified by his online handle, says he'll keep commenting online and defending the rights of others to express their own controversial or silly opinions.

"Whether people want to hear it or not," he said, a commenter "does have the right to say something stupid."

Filed: Other Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted
In case you're wondering as you read this article, here's the relevant bit from the VJ TOS:

However, Visajourney.com reserves the right at all times to disclose any information as necessary to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request

Watch what you say on VJ ... Ewok is reporting every word to the NSA, FBI and the WIGSS (Wookie Intergalactic Snitch Squad)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-...0,7539146.story

Anonymity is no guarantee in online postings

News organizations, courts finding ways to subpoena people who post defamatory comments in online forums

By Georgia Garvey and William Lee, Tribune reporters

February 14, 2010

Jeff Camacho uses an online handle when he spouts off about five times a day on the comment boards of newspaper Web sites. But the computer repairman realizes one of the often-overlooked truths of posting: His identity is easily uncovered.

"As long as the newspaper is not selling my information to marketers, I really don't care," said Camacho, 45, of Cary. "A lot of people think they're anonymous online. You're really not."

Write something threatening or defamatory and the mask of anonymity can be removed. It's technologically simple to track the source of a comment; the more difficult question is when it should be done.

Policies vary as much as the Web sites that create them, and when site operators do reveal the identity of anonymous commenters, they balance values such as free speech, public safety and the ability to foster an online community.

"If people … are afraid that some editor is going to look behind the administrative interface, then (they) won't come and talk on the site, and they certainly won't be as willing to talk about controversial topics," said David Ardia, director of Harvard Law School's Citizen Media Law Project.

Often, though, courts can force the unveiling. If subpoenaed, most Web operators can produce a poster's IP, or Internet protocol, address, which usually can be traced back to an Internet provider or commenter.

In a typical scenario, someone makes a comment alleged to be defamatory. That's what happened when Lisa Stone, a Buffalo Grove village trustee, took offense to a posting on a Daily Herald site by someone calling himself "Hipcheck16."

The comment, made to Stone's 15-year-old son, insinuated the teen made a habit of inviting strange men to his home.

"Or do they usually invite you to their house?" Hipcheck16 added.

An appalled Stone sought the writer's identity in court, and a judge ruled in November that she should be told the commenter's name. The poster's attorney has appealed. Stone said she believes the man, identified as "John Doe" in court documents, would never have made the comments to her son's face.

"I would say that he was very confident that (his identity) couldn't be discovered," Stone said.

While complying with subpoenas isn't unusual, some argue the ease with which an ID can be acquired should be made clearer to those using comment boards.

News organizations everywhere are untangling these issues. Decisions at the Tribune are made individually, said Karen Flax, assistant general counsel for the Tribune Company. She said that, even under subpoena, the company will try to inform a commenter before releasing information about him or her, something the Tribune's Terms of Service permits.

Flax says the Tribune has been subpoenaed more than once for information about anonymous posters, including civil cases where people felt they had been defamed and criminal cases where someone may have witnessed a crime.

"We would always try to give time to let the poster go (to court) and quash" the subpoena, Flax said. There may also be instances where the news organization determines the commenter was acting as a news source and the company could elect to fight to protect the person's privacy, she said.

Add to the complicated stew of issues an Internet culture of free-wheeling commentary, and the results can be unpredictable.

"There are purists who think the Internet is a fundamentally different medium and that the old rules — that is, vetting letters to the editor — should not be applied to comments," says Jim Hopkins, a former reporter based in San Francisco who runs several media blogs. "I've been hit with the same criticism. If you limit these comments in any way, (critics say) you're engaging in censorship."

Those judged guilty of violating a poster's privacy can be sentenced to serious digital scorn. A good example is Kurt Greenbaum, an editor at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch who tipped off the employer of an anonymous commenter who posted an offensive statement on the paper's Web site.

Greenbaum posted a question last November on a blog on the Post-Dispatch site asking, "What's the craziest thing you've ever eaten?" One commenter, according to a post Greenbaum later wrote, replied with a vulgarity. Greenbaum reported he deleted the post, but it popped up again from the same user.

This time he used the Internet protocol address to contact the place where the comment originated, a school. Officials tracked down the poster, an employee, and confronted him. The man resigned, Greenbaum reported in a blog post titled: "Post a vulgar comment while you're at work, lose your job."

Hundreds of comments excoriating Greenbaum were posted on the newspaper's site — as well as on Greenbaum's personal blog posts on the topic.

Greenbaum declined to comment for this story, but Bob Rose, deputy managing editor of online and production for the Post-Dispatch, said the paper even considered calling police at one point after the "volume and intensity" of the criticism reached a fever pitch.

"Did I overreact?" asked Greenbaum in a later post. "Maybe I did. I am constantly frustrated by the difficulty of dealing with this kind of language."

Although some lament civility's demise online, Chris Tolles holds a more liberal view. Tolles is CEO of Topix.com, which he said posts between 120,000 and 150,000 comments a day.

"Enabling people to say what they will," he said, "makes for a better society in the long run, because it means people have to have a thicker skin (and) it means a lot of things come out that wouldn't have come out."

Ultimately, Camacho, the frequent poster from Cary, knows some may not like what he writes. Camacho, who asked not to be identified by his online handle, says he'll keep commenting online and defending the rights of others to express their own controversial or silly opinions.

"Whether people want to hear it or not," he said, a commenter "does have the right to say something stupid."

Didn't you read the fine print on the home page. :bonk: Read, young man, read. :bonk: They also monitor cell phone communications, Hell the US Army is data mining kids in high school and junior high so they can target them as potential cannon fodder recruits. It's brave new world, welcome to it Mr. Huxley. :crying:

IR5

2007-07-27 – Case complete at NVC waiting on the world or at least MTL.

2007-12-19 - INTERVIEW AT MTL, SPLIT DECISION.

2007-12-24-Mom's I-551 arrives, Pop's still in purgatory (AP)

2008-03-11-AP all done, Pop is approved!!!!

tumblr_lme0c1CoS21qe0eclo1_r6_500.gif

Filed: Other Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted
Knock it off. Those hurt. One :bonk: should be enough.

Would you prefer if I punched you in the groin? :P

IR5

2007-07-27 – Case complete at NVC waiting on the world or at least MTL.

2007-12-19 - INTERVIEW AT MTL, SPLIT DECISION.

2007-12-24-Mom's I-551 arrives, Pop's still in purgatory (AP)

2008-03-11-AP all done, Pop is approved!!!!

tumblr_lme0c1CoS21qe0eclo1_r6_500.gif

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Philippines
Timeline
Posted
Hell the US Army is data mining kids in high school and junior high so they can target them as potential cannon fodder recruits.

What do they need data mining for when recruiters routinely contact high school students long before the Internet existed?

Junior high students? I doubt that one.

David & Lalai

th_ourweddingscrapbook-1.jpg

aneska1-3-1-1.gif

Greencard Received Date: July 3, 2009

Lifting of Conditions : March 18, 2011

I-751 Application Sent: April 23, 2011

Biometrics: June 9, 2011

Filed: Other Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted
wrestling02.jpg

Now that's what I'm talking about. It's good practice for the reverse cowgirl with a wrestler's bridge. :devil:

Pssst. Once suplexed and pinned a guy who weighed 360. :o My back still hasn't forgiven me. :lol:

IR5

2007-07-27 – Case complete at NVC waiting on the world or at least MTL.

2007-12-19 - INTERVIEW AT MTL, SPLIT DECISION.

2007-12-24-Mom's I-551 arrives, Pop's still in purgatory (AP)

2008-03-11-AP all done, Pop is approved!!!!

tumblr_lme0c1CoS21qe0eclo1_r6_500.gif

Filed: Other Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted
What do they need data mining for when recruiters routinely contact high school students long before the Internet existed?

Junior high students? I doubt that one.

It's taken on a whole new level of invasion of privacy now. They know everything about a potential recruit now. Shopping habits, hobbies, anything goes these days. It's not the same as giving speeches or handing out brochures. Whether or not you doubt that they are data mining Junior High Students is irrelevant, it is happening. You can't close your eyes to the truth. Students are being tracked and all that information is compiled and in the same way credit card companies target potential consumers, the recruiters are given dossiers on who they are likely to have the best chance to recruit. Since there is a stop loss problem and the draft is political suicide, the military (the US Army is the most agressive of all branches) must get bodies one way or another.

IR5

2007-07-27 – Case complete at NVC waiting on the world or at least MTL.

2007-12-19 - INTERVIEW AT MTL, SPLIT DECISION.

2007-12-24-Mom's I-551 arrives, Pop's still in purgatory (AP)

2008-03-11-AP all done, Pop is approved!!!!

tumblr_lme0c1CoS21qe0eclo1_r6_500.gif

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Philippines
Timeline
Posted
It's taken on a whole new level of invasion of privacy now. They know everything about a potential recruit now. Shopping habits, hobbies, anything goes these days. It's not the same as giving speeches or handing out brochures. Whether or not you doubt that they are data mining Junior High Students is irrelevant, it is happening. You can't close your eyes to the truth. Students are being tracked and all that information is compiled and in the same way credit card companies target potential consumers, the recruiters are given dossiers on who they are likely to have the best chance to recruit. Since there is a stop loss problem and the draft is political suicide, the military (the US Army is the most agressive of all branches) must get bodies one way or another.

They aren't data mining junior students and you've got nothing to prove it. Not a single source.

I was called by a recruiter years before the Internet and just said I wasn't interested at the time. I ended up joining the Army years later but it wasn't because of a recruiter. People bad mouth recruiters (even the military) but I'll take them over a draft or having another hollow force structure.

Stop-loss isn't major problem as soldiers aren't stuck in the military forever and few get tours extended.

"Despite Secretary Gates's order, by April 2008 use of stop-loss had increased by 43%.[9] Soldiers affected by stop-loss were then serving, on average, an extra 6.6 months, and sergeants through sergeants first class made up 45% of these soldiers. From 2002 through April 2008, 58,300 soldiers were affected by stop-loss, or about 1% of active duty, Reserve, and National Guard troops."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-loss_policy

The Army is getting plenty of bodies thanks to the piss poor economy.

David & Lalai

th_ourweddingscrapbook-1.jpg

aneska1-3-1-1.gif

Greencard Received Date: July 3, 2009

Lifting of Conditions : March 18, 2011

I-751 Application Sent: April 23, 2011

Biometrics: June 9, 2011

Filed: Other Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted
They aren't data mining junior students and you've got nothing to prove it. Not a single source.

I was called by a recruiter years before the Internet and just said I wasn't interested at the time. I ended up joining the Army years later but it wasn't because of a recruiter. People bad mouth recruiters (even the military) but I'll take them over a draft or having another hollow force structure.

Stop-loss isn't major problem as soldiers aren't stuck in the military forever and few get tours extended.

"Despite Secretary Gates's order, by April 2008 use of stop-loss had increased by 43%.[9] Soldiers affected by stop-loss were then serving, on average, an extra 6.6 months, and sergeants through sergeants first class made up 45% of these soldiers. From 2002 through April 2008, 58,300 soldiers were affected by stop-loss, or about 1% of active duty, Reserve, and National Guard troops."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-loss_policy

The Army is getting plenty of bodies thanks to the piss poor economy.

And the US is not in Algeria, want to try again. :bonk: It was in a story on NPR, I believe it was All Things Considered, one of the students was not happy. I guess the Commie Liberals of NPR aren't considered reliable in your eyes. Keep glossing over facts, it will help you sleep at night.

IR5

2007-07-27 – Case complete at NVC waiting on the world or at least MTL.

2007-12-19 - INTERVIEW AT MTL, SPLIT DECISION.

2007-12-24-Mom's I-551 arrives, Pop's still in purgatory (AP)

2008-03-11-AP all done, Pop is approved!!!!

tumblr_lme0c1CoS21qe0eclo1_r6_500.gif

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Philippines
Timeline
Posted
And the US is not in Algeria, want to try again. :bonk: It was in a story on NPR, I believe it was All Things Considered, one of the students was not happy. I guess the Commie Liberals of NPR aren't considered reliable in your eyes. Keep glossing over facts, it will help you sleep at night.

No link? I wouldn't say NPR is unreliable but you are incapable of basic research.

Since you didn't address anything I said you must not know much about recruiting beyond Algeria.

David & Lalai

th_ourweddingscrapbook-1.jpg

aneska1-3-1-1.gif

Greencard Received Date: July 3, 2009

Lifting of Conditions : March 18, 2011

I-751 Application Sent: April 23, 2011

Biometrics: June 9, 2011

Posted

Add a second layer on your tinfoil hat! Remember! Shiny side in!

I-129F Mailed 13DEC09
I-129F Received 16DEC09
NOA1 Dated 16DEC09
NOA2 Dated 18MAR10 Your I-129f was approved in 92 days from your NOA1 date.
Date Package Received By NVC : 27MAR10
Your interview took 153 days from your I-129F NOA1 date
Arrival in USA 06Jun10
Married 20AUG10
AOS File 19APR11

Son born 26NOV12

removal of conditions filed 11JUN13

Biometrics appt 09JUL13

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...