spam in the forum...

Gast · 2006-05-15T00:36:05+00:00

hier stand ganz viel spam aber es wurde gelöscht.

Gast

There used to be loads of spam here, but it’s been deleted.

Claudius

That is the downside of discussion forums where users can post messages without first registering. For legal reasons – bearing in mind the current legal situation, as outlined, for example, at http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/72878 – it is probably advisable to disable this feature.

Robert

...or at least have someone else host it.

Wolfgg

Mirko should add a feature that allows people to report posts to him that break the forum rules. That way, he’ll be notified straight away when something like that happens and won’t have to be constantly ‘on the ball’. Best regards, Wolfgang

AntiLynd

I wouldn't mind either if you could only post here after logging in first; just like on any other forum. (With a cookie, logging in is only a one-off thing anyway; at least on the same computer). Then you wouldn’t always have the problem of realising only after posting that you weren’t logged in at all, and then having to send a follow-up post saying ‘sorry, wasn’t logged in’ ...just an idea. Best regards Nils.

Guido

For legal reasons – bearing in mind the current legal situation, as outlined, for example, at http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/72878 – it is probably advisable to disable this function. [right][post="7710"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right]

Why? The spam posts were deleted once the operator became aware of them, as required by the ruling, and the Heise ruling (http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/72026 ) is not yet legally binding, as an appeal has been lodged against it.

Claudius

I assume that, given the current political climate, any form of expression that lawyers could exploit in some abstruse legal manner will either be suppressed or, indeed, exploited by lawyers in precisely that way. If one considers the composition of the German Bundestag, it becomes clear why: by far the largest professional group represented there is that of lawyers. So – regardless of the pending ‘Heise’ ruling – it is to be expected that in the near future, anyone who in any way expresses their dissatisfaction with any industrial enterprises, politicians or anyone else with money will be given a stern warning and then hounded through the courts. This amounts to aligning the interpretation of the right to freedom of expression, enshrined in the Basic Law, with the interpretation of the secrecy of postal and telecommunications communications, also enshrined in the Basic Law – which, as is well known, has been completely abolished by the last few federal governments. "Nobody has any intention of establishing a surveillance state" Sorry for the rant on a Tuesday morning, but what needs to come out has to come out.

Wolfgg

Sometimes I get the impression that the system has sent this magistrate in to rein in the troublesome, hitherto uncontrollable public discourse on the forums. Even if it’s only through legal intimidation (the cost of warning letters). After all, they have the TV and print media firmly under their control, along with the opinions ‘permitted’ there. I find the reasoning behind the judgement highly revealing; it actually states: ‘...forums are a particularly dangerous institution...’. Well, who would have thought it. So: the system is afraid and is apparently making preparations, under the guise of “counter-terrorism”, for Day X, when the situation gets out of hand. With the ever-growing mountain of unemployment and debt, this is no longer avoidable. From then on, far more people than currently do will be taking to the streets in white coats, making their voices heard. Regards, Wolfgang