Oolite Bulletins

Grrrrrrr.....

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201203 ... hors.shtml

The "Nanny State" strikes again.

It's comforting to know that out moral wellfare is being protected by the same people who've virtually destroyed the global economy in the pursuit of Mammon.

Selezen wrote:

The "Nanny State" strikes again.

The thing is, it's not the Nanny State – it's the Unelected and Unaccountable Cabal of Nanny Corporations. The idea that we should all take our moral tone from bankers is, as Smivs suggests, a bit ripe. And what's to stop them pressurising Smashwords, and other retailers, into classifying other types of content – say, a critique of tax avoidance schemes – as undesirable, too?

I finally saw the light about PayPal's ethics in 2004 and closed my account and wrote to them complaining about their business practices. A tiny, teensy protest and I am sure they didn't care.

But I have not bought anything through them since then, which means I do no use suppliers who use PayPal.

It has only just dawned on me I am boycotting PayPal and have been for 8 years.

Are you willing to do the same? To be inconvenienced and shop around or even go without stuff to make a point? If so, join me in my teeny, tiny protest. If not, well, you can see where this is heading.

Role playing games and wargaming have been attacked for corrupting children's minds and moralities as have computer games. Oolite covers two or three of those interests and the thread about alien felines is close to one of the banned areas in the censorship mentioned above.

Should there be a ban of open source (i.e. uncontrolled and anonymous), fantasist, wargaming, violent, murder and piracy emulation software like Oolite?

[size=120]Rant_Mode := TRUE;[/size]

Regarding censorship in general, my wife worked for a health promotion unit in the NHS. She was regularly approached by people who were being exposed to or hurt by practices they did not feel comfortable with, or had queries about their own body. They did not know where to go for help and would eventually turn to this service as it was anonymous. However, my wife (a professional information manager) was unable to use the internet access provided to help them because virtually everything she ever needed to look up was blocked. Thankfully, the book collection she amassed was not censored and covered stuff that made me regret the day I flicked through a few.

(The book on VD symptoms had loads of pictures that turned my stomach but was regularly used by visitors who were too embarrassed to see their GP, or too young to go without a parent wanting to know why they were going, or of a culture that meant they could not go without telling the man of the house. Being able to get confirmation they probably were poorly, but were not evil people for picking up a highly infectious disease, then enabled them to seek treatment.)

No thought goes into censorship: it is ignorance that causes corruption and creates victims. Those in power who impose ignorance on the masses are committing one of the greatest crimes that can be committed against society.

Amazing. Can't imagine pressuring your own moral on clients is legal though if you are part of a oligopoly.

I note that the only links in the article are to (6) techdirt articles and (2) smashwords weblog posts. One would assume that a real journalist would consider it germane to explore why the "pressure from credit card providers" is being instituted. Perhaps by contacting paypal or a credit card provider. Telephones, email, you know, the stuff of due diligence before penning a one-sided screed masquerading as fact.

I strongly doubt "credit card providers" give a proverbial airborn fornication about beastiality, rape, incest, or paedophilia. Given that they are publicly traded companies, they are under a rather severe legal obligation to serve the best interests of their investors. This implies not having their assets seized for various violations of the criminal code.

These credit card companies are using their position to censor speech

No, they're trying to prevent their business from being shut down. Paying for illegal pornography is every bit as illegal as producing, selling, distributing, or consuming it. If smashwords wants to continue to serve the grey-market of illicit pornography, they shouldn't try to force others to explicitly support it. That credit card providers are worried about their liability for the stupidity of smashwords is good.

From other sources it is now implied that Credit Cards have additional levies for "dodgy" stuff (like pron) - paypal is trying to pass this on to Smashwords and Smashwords doesn't want to pay it. But again, mostly hearsay.

(Although I posted it because of the implications if it turns out to be even vaguely true...)