CONservative MP Wants to know who you are


tay
#1
Parliament should look into how to raise the level of online discourse by making anonymous commenters identify themselves, according to Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro.

“While I believe firmly that the right to free speech must be strongly defended and protected, I also believe it should be backed up by the common decency to stand by one’s words as opposed to hiding behind online anonymity,” the Peterborough MP said in the House of Commons Friday.

Mr. Del Mastro, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, first brought up the issue on his Facebook page Thursday. Mr. Del Mastro has rarely spoken publicly in recent months, as Elections Canada probes allegations of campaign spending irregularities by his 2008 campaign.

more

Tory MP says government should do something about anonymous online comments - The Globe and Mail
 
Most helpful post: The members here have rated this post as best reply.
TenPenny
+6
#2  Top Rated Post
Why does the government have a role to play in on line discourse. Are they going to send government inspectors to every house party, to take names and supervise discussions?

This guy is a complete wanker.
 
Machjo
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by tayView Post

Parliament should look into how to raise the level of online discourse by making anonymous commenters identify themselves, according to Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro.

“While I believe firmly that the right to free speech must be strongly defended and protected, I also believe it should be backed up by the common decency to stand by one’s words as opposed to hiding behind online anonymity,” the Peterborough MP said in the House of Commons Friday.

Mr. Del Mastro, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, first brought up the issue on his Facebook page Thursday. Mr. Del Mastro has rarely spoken publicly in recent months, as Elections Canada probes allegations of campaign spending irregularities by his 2008 campaign.

more

Tory MP says government should do something about anonymous online comments - The Globe and Mail

Hard to say. I appreciate my anonymity online, but I can also understand his point. While I do try to behave myself within reason online, I'll admit that sometimes I do say things that I wouldn't say otherwise.

To be fair to politicians and other public figures, I guess there is a point that if someone slanders them online, at least have the courtesy to let them know who you are. On the other hand, they can still defend themselves even if you are anonymous; it just undermines your position should you choose to remain anonymous.

I would rather we remain anonymous, but I can also see his point too.

Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Why does the government have a role to play in on line discourse. Are they going to send government inspectors to every house party, to take names and supervise discussions?

This guy is a complete wanker.

Now that's a goo point. If we think of these forums as strinctly informal, which they are, then they really needn't be so supervised short of online stalking, etc.
 
Niflmir
Free Thinker
+3
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by tayView Post

Parliament should look into how to raise the level of online discourse by making anonymous commenters identify themselves, according to Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro.

“While I believe firmly that the right to free speech must be strongly defended and protected, I also believe it should be backed up by the common decency to stand by one’s words as opposed to hiding behind online anonymity,” the Peterborough MP said in the House of Commons Friday.

“While I believe firmly that the right to free speech must be strongly defended and protected, I also believe it should never be used.”

The politically powerful don't understand the plight of the politically weak. Once upon a time in Canada, you would be jailed for being homosexual. This situation was formally ended only in 1971. Before that time, it would certainly be noble but less than wise to stand up and proudly proclaim that you were homosexual.

There are hundreds of similar situations.

However, why should there be so many more extreme laws for the online world? Nothing stops me from anonymously mailing someone. This is a formal right which has been upheld for millenia. Even anonymous telephone calls are possible with pay phones. Shouldn't we take away the ability to mail envelopes without showing ID before we force identification on the internet? Pretty hard to send anthrax through the internet.
 
B00Mer
Libertarian
+1
#5
Interesting... everytime I post online my IP is attached to the post... does that not identify me..

At least he is not following Obama's idea.. Thank God, wanting to charge a usage fee everytime you use the Internet. That is desperate ideas to tackle a 14 trillian dollar deficits .... starting with the USA, will be picked up ny other countries.

DailyTech - Obama's FCC Looks to Tax the Internet
 
Niflmir
Free Thinker
+2
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

Interesting... everytime I post online my IP is attached to the post... does that not identify me..

No, it does not. It is relatively trivial to set up proxies, and you can always spoof your neighbour if you can sniff their packets. With NAT (many people are NATed nowadays) you can only determine a general area as well. Even WEP has a number of exploitable weaknesses.

There are plenty of cases where they burst down somebody's door looking for child pornography based on an IP address, only to find out, an IP address is not a person. Judges are becoming extremely leery of justifying search warrants based on IP addresses because of past mistakes based upon this mistaken equivocation.
 
Machjo
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

Interesting... everytime I post online my IP is attached to the post... does that not identify me..DailyTech - Obama's FCC Looks to Tax the Internet

No, it identifies your computer, not you yourself. You can change computers just as anyone can use your computer, hypothetically.
 
petros
#8
MPs get AirMiles for every sucker they can get onto the no fly list?
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#9
I cansee his point. If you read the comments on news articles many are clearly libelous and/or downright rude. When you speak at a public meeting you are required to state your name. Why be any different online?
 
Walter
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

I cansee his point. If you read the comments on news articles many are clearly libelous and/or downright rude. When you speak at a public meeting you are required to state your name. Why be any different online?

Online isn't public.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by WalterView Post

Online isn't public.

It is when it is the comments section of news articles.
 
petros
+2
#12
I've been trying to introduce myself to my MP for years. The ****er just won't return any calls.
 
tay
#13
Well since the CONservatives are eager to sell out anything that makes Canada, well, Canada, nothing would surprise me as to what they want to do...........


Authorities have also blocked the news organisation's main and Chinese-language websites and banned searches for "New York Times" in English and Chinese on microblogs.

"China manages the internet in accordance with laws and rules," Hong told reporters at a daily briefing when asked why the sites were inaccessible.


more

New York Times blocked by China after report on wealth of Wen Jiabao's family | World news | guardian.co.uk
 
petros
+2 / -1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by tayView Post

Well since the CONservatives are eager to sell out anything that makes Canada, well, Canada, nothing would surprise me as to what they want to do..........

If Canadian companies were to pull out of all the resource ventures world wide, you'd be unemployed and starving by the end of next week.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

If Canadian companies were to pull out of all the resource ventures world wide, you'd be unemployed and starving by the end of next week.

Can the bank bounce welfare cheques?
 
petros
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Can the bank bounce welfare cheques?

Banks don't have to accept any cheque if they don't want to.
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by B00Mer;1664457[url=http://www.dailytech.com/Obamas+FCC+Looks+to+Tax+the+Internet/article25536.htm

DailyTech - Obama's FCC Looks to Tax the Internet[/url]

After reading this article I see the govt is up to its usual tricks. It sets up an entity, the USF, which is not needed or required under the constitution, and then levies a tax to fund the program which wasn't needed in the first place.

I say if there isn't a very real need or a constitutional requirement for such a program then the tax to fund it should be considered illegal anyway. The govts, contrary to popular belief, actually are supposed to justify taxation under the constitution and cannot lawfully levy taxes for things that are not required. Most taxes we have are unlawful these days, the people have just been fooled and brainwashed into believing the govt has the right to tax anything for any purpose. I await the day when the general populace wakes up to the fact the govt really is stealing from us.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Banks don't have to accept any cheque if they don't want to.

I'm not sure about the rest of the country but in BC the 5 charter banks are lawfully bound to accept them with proper ID. As far as I know the 5 are also bound across the country to accept checks from the federal govt (EI, Pension etc).
 
Nuggler
+1
#18
I would be only too happy to receive an e.mail from that pissant, a phone call, a personal visit even. I would explain to him who I am.
 
petros
#19
Do you think that really matters to a bank?

True story....wife and I were shopping in Chinatown Vancouver, nobody would accept a $100 bill so we wandered down to E. Hasting and Columbia to Pigeon Park Savings. Behind us in line two guys were smoking crack in the bank line up. Out from an office comes the bank manager who said "sorry, we won't be cashing your cheque, you can go to Money Mart".
 
Nuggler
+1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Do you think that really matters to a bank?

True story....wife and I were shopping in Chinatown Vancouver, nobody would accept a $100 bill so we wandered down to E. Hasting and Columbia to Pigeon Park Savings. Behind us in line two guys were smoking crack in the bank line up. Out from an office comes the bank manager who said "sorry, we won't be cashing your cheque, you can go to Money Mart".

Nice digs eh? The cops patrol in threes according to my family out there (Lions Bay area)..........them's really nice digs. Nice to see someone in our family turned out well..............

You and I both misspell cheque according to spellchecker. gotta love Americanization.
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Do you think that really matters to a bank?

True story....wife and I were shopping in Chinatown Vancouver, nobody would accept a $100 bill so we wandered down to E. Hasting and Columbia to Pigeon Park Savings. Behind us in line two guys were smoking crack in the bank line up. Out from an office comes the bank manager who said "sorry, we won't be cashing your cheque, you can go to Money Mart".

I have to assume that is because they were smoking crack in the bank. If they were just waiting in line normally they would most likely have been served.
 
petros
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

I have to assume that is because they were smoking crack in the bank. If they were just waiting in line normally they would most likely have been served.

It's still a refusal.
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
#23
The governments want to know who we are and what we are saying, the police and other
authorities would merely be gathering the information. The reason is quite simple, until
now they could tap the phone or read your mail, now we have social media and they have
a difficult time trying to control it. If people actually had a means to speak their mind with
real truths that the government could not influence, control or monitor that would be a very
bad thing indeed. How can you control ideas and thinking when you know some of the
content and you don't identify who said it? The government is afraid of us having such a
liberating experience therefore they must find a reason for us to accept and give up our
new found freedom. There is one positive thing about this, both the Liberal and Conservative
elements of power are equally as afraid.
See the Internet could be what draws us together or indeed sets the seeds of our own social
destruction, and it all depends on who controls the leavers and who gets control first.
In any event if we could come back a century down the road we would not even recognize the
landscape socially or politically. Have a good day my fellow lemmings if we allow the government
to control the Internet.
 
Walter
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

It is when it is the comments section of news articles.

No, it isn't.
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

It's still a refusal.

Not a refusal based upon it being a welfare check. The refusal was based upon illegal activity on private property which is quite legitimate. They are very lucky the cops weren't called.

Cashing your Government of Canada Cheque for Free
Quote:

Under Canadian law, you have the right to cash your Government of Canada cheque for free.

You can cash a Government of Canada cheque for free at any bank, even if you are not a customer.

 
tay
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

If Canadian companies were to pull out of all the resource ventures world wide, you'd be unemployed and starving by the end of next week.



Why would I, or anyone else be unemployed if Canadian Companies pull out of resource ventures around the world?
 
TenPenny
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by tayView Post

Why would I, or anyone else be unemployed if Canadian Companies pull out of resource ventures around the world?

Probably because quite a few Canadian resource companies would cease to exist, and those Canadians employed, and the spin offs created by that, would end. It's a funny thing how the economy works.
 
tay
#28
So if Goldcorp or others pull out of African or South American mines that would do what to Canadians employment numbers?
 

Similar Threads

38
How conservative are you?
by Machjo | Apr 30th, 2012
46
Why are you Conservative?
by CanadienA1 | Jan 6th, 2007
3
Welcome to the Conservative Lounge
by Andem | Dec 20th, 2005
no new posts