Actually, if this was enforceable, it would be a civil liberties nightmare. More wishful thinking enacted into legislation by the Bush administration:
Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.
It’s no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.
In other words, it’s OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name.
– Create an e-annoyance, go to jail | Perspectives | CNET News.com
Jack would be fine though because he did it under his real name, wouldn’t he? Or was that not his real name?
What an odd person- although his declaration that he had violated *ALL* of God’s commandments was one of the odder OP moments.
Tom
Jack was almost tolerable when he was being Jack, pseudo-christian that he is. But in his other incarnations, such as damion, Dick Hertz (from my old blog, comments didn’t make it over to WordPress), or derkaderka (click “show all comments”). Pee-ew!
I can’t show you the worst of his stuff because I never allowed it to be published.
Ohhhhh…
I always wondered who Damion and Dimion were. Didn’t put two and two together. He was pretty annoying under those names.
According to the Guardian’s tech blog, this is basically a blogosphere rumour:
“Annoying” people, or even being very rude to them in comments or emails, is legitimate First Amendment speech in the US, anonymous or not. (Of course in the UK we expect people to just behave, because that’s, you know, British.)
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/archives/2006/01/11/is_it_against_the_law_in_the_us_to_post_a_rude_comment_actually_no.html
Exactly! That’s why I said “if this was enforceable…”
See, that’s what I get for skim-reading your blog entries and then gleefully posting a comment!
That’s quite alright. You’re welcome any time, Mr. Trouser. 😉