Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by adam86shadow View Post
    I can imagine the OPs social media pages
    It's all links to the Blaze.

    I have a guy like this on my FB. Same disdain for the English language.

  2. #22
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    do you have an expectation of privacy posting anything on MMOC forum?
    Again, one of these things is not like the other.

    You don't have an expectation of privacy in your own home, if you leave all the doors and windows open.

    Posting on MMO Champion is like having all the doors and windows open, or not having your yard fenced in with a fence that prevents line of sight, you are essentially leaving these areas open to public viewing. Other websites, like Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and so on, have a "private" option, where only people who you allow to see your posts can see them. In such cases, you DO have an expectation of privacy. Beyond that, MMO Champion is still a private website, although it keeps its doors open, it could choose not to, and require viewing to require a membership, and could in its terms of service state that government employees may not set up a membership with the intent of monitoring other members posts.

    You quite clearly don't understand how the right to privacy works. It is far more nuanced that you are claiming and even moreso than I can explain in a forum post.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  3. #23
    Legendary! TZucchini's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Wish it was Canada
    Posts
    6,989
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    because the excuse given why they shouldn't use social media to vet any one who enters this country because it wouldn't be PC to do so
    What? Who said that? Are you just making things up?
    Eat yo vegetables

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    Again, one of these things is not like the other.

    You don't have an expectation of privacy in your own home, if you leave all the doors and windows open.

    Posting on MMO Champion is like having all the doors and windows open, or not having your yard fenced in with a fence that prevents line of sight, you are essentially leaving these areas open to public viewing. Other websites, like Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and so on, have a "private" option, where only people who you allow to see your posts can see them. In such cases, you DO have an expectation of privacy. Beyond that, MMO Champion is still a private website, although it keeps its doors open, it could choose not to, and require viewing to require a membership, and could in its terms of service state that government employees may not set up a membership with the intent of monitoring other members posts.

    You quite clearly don't understand how the right to privacy works. It is far more nuanced that you are claiming and even moreso than I can explain in a forum post.
    correct if you use the privacy option which at first you didn't state then if you are an American citizen a warrant would need to be issued to look at but we aren't talking about American citizens now are we. the rights given by the constitution is granted to the citizens of the united states not every one else in the world

  5. #25
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0648fe301bf5c

    They never expressed threats on social media apparently. They did claim jihad in private conversations.
    Last edited by Varvara Spiros Gelashvili; 2015-12-17 at 09:15 PM.
    Violence Jack Respects Women!

  6. #26
    The Insane Revi's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The land of the ice and snow.
    Posts
    15,628
    Sounds fair enough. If you want to enter a country, they can ask whatever information they want of you.

    I would think it was stupid of them to deny entry based on critique of their government or something like that, but some people post pretty extreme stuff on their social media.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    What? Who said that? Are you just making things up?
    A secret U.S. policy that prohibits immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas was reportedly kept in place over fears of a civil liberties backlash and “bad public relations.”-----

    "The primary concern was that it would be viewed negatively if it was disclosed publicly and there were concerns that it would be embarrassing," Cohen told ABC’s Good Morning America on Monday
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...pplicants.html

  8. #28
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    correct if you use the privacy option which at first you didn't state then if you are an American citizen a warrant would need to be issued to look at but we aren't talking about American citizens now are we. the rights given by the constitution is granted to the citizens of the united states not every one else in the world
    It was in my 2nd post, post #10, because that's where I was discussing the matter of privacy, the first post I made was not. It doesn't matter if you're using an US-based service internationally, because Facebook has a right to privacy even if the person using it is not a US citizen. This is why so many European laws are attempting to limit how private online information can be, because since Facebook is based on the US, Facebook itsself has protections, even if it's users do not. Though some of that also depends on where the data is stored, some protections afforded to Facebook the company may not apply to its data if the data is stored outside the US.

    Again, it's nuanced and the issue of other international laws makes it even more complicated.

    In any case: as a rule of thumb the people whose pages we are looking at are either going to be bleedingly obvious about their loyalties or very secretive and it's not very difficult to just not post pro-terrorism things online. It's not like social media reads your mind.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    It was in my 2nd post, post #10, because that's where I was discussing the matter of privacy, the first post I made was not. It doesn't matter if you're using an US-based service internationally, because Facebook has a right to privacy even if the person using it is not a US citizen. This is why so many European laws are attempting to limit how private online information can be, because since Facebook is based on the US, Facebook itsself has protections, even if it's users do not. Though some of that also depends on where the data is stored, some protections afforded to Facebook the company may not apply to its data if the data is stored outside the US.

    Again, it's nuanced and the issue of other international laws makes it even more complicated.

    In any case: as a rule of thumb the people whose pages we are looking at are either going to be bleedingly obvious about their loyalties or very secretive and it's not very difficult to just not post pro-terrorism things online. It's not like social media reads your mind.
    law enforcement isn't required to adhere to a companies policy or rules

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    It was in my 2nd post, post #10, because that's where I was discussing the matter of privacy, the first post I made was not. It doesn't matter if you're using an US-based service internationally, because Facebook has a right to privacy even if the person using it is not a US citizen. This is why so many European laws are attempting to limit how private online information can be, because since Facebook is based on the US, Facebook itsself has protections, even if it's users do not. Though some of that also depends on where the data is stored, some protections afforded to Facebook the company may not apply to its data if the data is stored outside the US.
    Yes, it is the same old "what do we care for the laws of other countries, only US citizens have rights" that we all love about the US.

  11. #31
    Legendary! TZucchini's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Wish it was Canada
    Posts
    6,989
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    A secret U.S. policy that prohibits immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas was reportedly kept in place over fears of a civil liberties backlash and “bad public relations.”-----

    "The primary concern was that it would be viewed negatively if it was disclosed publicly and there were concerns that it would be embarrassing," Cohen told ABC’s Good Morning America on Monday
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...pplicants.html
    Vyxn, what does PC mean to you? Can you define it for us?
    Eat yo vegetables

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    What the shit does "social media vetting by the Federal Government" have to do with "SJW and their PC absurdity"? How are these two things related?
    They probably see people on the left criticizing those further to the left (or at least those with an authoritarian bent) and think that's an opportunity to hitch their bullshit to the hate wagon.

  13. #33
    Legendary! Collegeguy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Antarctica
    Posts
    6,955
    So the vetting process for an interview is more strenuous than what the govt will allow for the NSA?

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    Vyxn, what does PC mean to you? Can you define it for us?
    I will let Wikipedia explain
    Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct, commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term primarily used as a pejorative to describe language, policies, or measures which are intended not to offend or disadvantage any particular group of people in society
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness

    they didn't want to use someone's social media page to vet them because they deemed it as might be offensive

  15. #35
    Political corectness means nothing. Like seriously i see people on the right blaming jihadist on political corectness

    yeah reagan was so " politically correct " and fighting against racism and xenophobia when he was arming the mujahideen lead by osama bin laden in his proxy war against the soviets. oops i brought up a historical event that goes against the right, now im being a social justice warrior and my point is moot.

    these people dont know how realpolotik works in the real world.

  16. #36
    Honestly with all the tension I think just increasing the thoroughness of the vetting process for visa applicants is pretty mild. I would much rather increase the vetting process than prevent any from coming here or just letting them come over here without being adequately vetted.

  17. #37
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by negawonka View Post
    Honestly with all the tension I think just increasing the thoroughness of the vetting process for visa applicants is pretty mild. I would much rather increase the vetting process than prevent any from coming here or just letting them come over here without being adequately vetted.
    The vetting process is already extremely intensive.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    The vetting process is already extremely intensive.
    Perhaps, but I would much rather that extra thoroughness. I accept that their privacy will be somewhat more violated, but sometimes you have to just take one for the team.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    The vetting process is already extremely intensive.
    sure it is you can get a visa using a fake or false address just ask the women jihadist in the last radical Muslim terrorist attack

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    its not spying it is looking at what anyone else could look at
    If their profiles were set to private... it is spying. I don't care personally because I think it should be part of the vetting process but its still spying.

    They never expressed threat on social medium but in private conversations. Getting access to those would be consider spying. if the person profile was set to private, but I think that should be part of the vetting process. So its w/e with me.

    Certain parts of the united states would be pissed about the intrusion of privacy and they aren't only social justice warriors. Sjw and pc fall into this but the right likes protecting civil liberties as well.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0648fe301bf5c
    Last edited by Varvara Spiros Gelashvili; 2015-12-17 at 09:55 PM.
    Violence Jack Respects Women!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •