Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyAlley
BTW: For those of you that would like to read an opinion from someone that doesn't know what MikeAI's anus tastes like, here's what the chairman of the Free Speech Coalition has to say about DirectNic:
http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/F...view&coid=1014
Here's just one little ditty from the article:
|
you're right. the only valid view point ... is yours. there are no others... because anyone else taking the time to create a very lucid, well thought out, well defended point is obviously "retarded" ... because there is such "genius" in name calling vs. actual discussion based on facts and reality and the complexity of the real issues at hand.
if you have anything to say other than "i dont agree with it and anyone who doesn't agree with me is a retard" then lets hear it. otherwise, you have nothing to say and have done nothing but resort to name calling when someone doesn't agree with you. this isn't the third grade. this is actually a very serious incident with wide ranging implications that people should be considering (not to mention all the fucking idiots who arean't even remotely close to being 2257 compliant anyway)
SO.... someone took the time to put it all together, pull up the laws, explain it and so on and all you can do to refute it is point to the response of a free speech attorney and PR man... why is the opinion of this attorney more valid than the opinions of DirectNIC attorneys?
seems to me, thats something worth discussing.
i dont agree with what Directnic did. I dont think they should be policing people. But people don't want to accept the fact that they are most probably acting well within the law and "their rights" and they need to stop and rethink how they are doing business.