Category Archives: Internet Drama

Stop SOPA: the Manifesto

Posted on by
Stop SOPA

Stop SOPA

We’re big fans of manifestii around these parts, and we’re big enemies of internet censorship, so when we saw this Anti-SOPA Manifesto by Alex Lindsay on G+, we knew we had to pass it on.

The Manifesto…

We’ve tried to ignore the problem… I tried to ignore the problem. I wanted to ignore the politics of the internet and, in many ways, politics itself. From a netizen point of view, Democracy often seems inefficient and ineffectual. But just because WE want to ignore it, doesn’t mean politics wants to ignore us.

There are many groups who would subjugate us if they could. They would force us to pay every time we heard a song on the car radio, they would make sure we can’t speak freely about their brand or their brand of government, they would exert complete control over our online existence.

As Netizens, we naively think that calmer heads will prevail and this has often been the case… but laws like SOPA and PIPA, which could potentially make the Patriot Act look tame if used to their fullest extent… continue to be paid for by big industry and pushed through congress. These acts are not just bad, they are unAmerican and more akin to something we would see in China or Iran… not here.

How does this happen? It’s simple enough, Congressmen are paid to make laws that would oppress us. In the emerging world, this would be called “Corruption”… here it’s called “Contribution”. It’s easy. These laws are complicated and their most of their constituents don’t even know that their congressmen are involved or how these laws would affect them. The industries behind these laws are wealthy and spend lavishly on representatives willing to support them. Most importantly… there is little to no political pain for these representatives. They fill their campaign coffers with cash… if the bill fails, they keep the cash and it’s quickly forgotten. If the bill passes, they’ll get more money next year.

This needs to stop.

We can no longer expect our representatives, many of whom couldn’t write an email on their own, to represent us without firm action. We can no longer depend on OUR means of discussion – Facebook, Twitter, and Email -l to express ourselves.

We need to fight these laws, and the lawmakers that would pass them, in their back yard. We need to earn their respect, and fear if necessary. We need them to know that supporting these bills has a political cost.

We need a sort of “Internet Protection Fund”, a PAC, that is designed for a single purpose – To use every legal means to attack those who would attack us. To bring the fight to to their doorstep, their airwaves, and their TVs. We need to organize and focus the resistance.

Step 1 – Stop the SOPA and PIPA before they are passed through targeted boycotts, information campaigns, and letter writing campaigns.

Step 2 – Target those in Congress who support these bills and attempt to unseat them in the fall with internet, grassroots, TV and Radio campaigns. Congress needs to know that supporting these bills is no longer a blank check…it’s no longer safe.

Step 3 – We need to build our organization BETWEEN elections, build its resources, and build its capacity to defend our rights… aggressively. This fight is about to intensify as the information age matures. We need to begin to take an active role in shaping our online future.

This is not a replacement for organizations like the Electronic Freedom Foundation… without whom we will be already be in virtual chains. This is the sharp end of the stick that comes when they are not able to negotiate our freedom. These are the troops that back up the political discussions with real, tangible, action.

This is not a replacement for Anonymous. They play harder than we will. We will keep our fight within the confines of the current laws. We will use every means within those laws to express the will of those we represent but we will stay well within the confines of the current rules.

We will play by the political rules that our opponents play by… not the ones we wish they would play. We will use our skills, connections and ability to organize online but we will bring this fight to their field and beat them there.

So now what do we do?

Step one: +1 this post and pass it on. If there is enough interest, the next steps will be somewhat obvious (begin the organization structure). Comment and let me know what you think and what you would do next. If there is enough interest… more posts will follow.

For the Haters

Posted on by

On the Interwebz, you’re nobody till somebody hates you, so OccupyVancouver shouldn’t take to heart the recent emergence of a parody twitter stream, 0ccupyvancouver (with a zero, and how! not an o; this humourless git probably never had an O in his life without his mother in the room).

http://twitter.com/#!/0ccupyVancouver/status/152478363792052225

To call it a humour-challenged account is to understate the case to a positively injunctable extent; it’s so bad that it had four followers when I saw it this afternoon, and about eight hours later it was down to three. That’s no doubt its mother, uncledaddy, and sisterwife.

Strangely, they have a platform that I think we can all support:

Continue reading →

The Most Brilliant Protest Idea in the entire history of this space-time continuum

Posted on by
Knock Knock, who's there

Knock Knock, who's there WE TOLD YOU TO EXPECT US!

No, seriously,

The.

Most.

Brilliant.

/Shatnervoice

from GramercyPolice on Gawker:

…organize a fake protest flashmob. When the police show up, they should say they’re not protesting, they’re just impersonating protestors. See if Bloomberg still orders the police to beat up some reporters and Iraq war vets, just out of habit. Of course, then he’d say he’s only impersonating a mayor telling the police to beat up reporters and Iraq war vets. It’s all very meta.

Post-postmodernist, and almost certainly not prosecutable. Suddenly, 2pm Monday afternoon looks a lot more interesting.

Operation Global Media Domination: The Google+ Situation

Posted on by
well in fact I AM a big deal on Google+

well in fact I AM a big deal on Google+

You know how we hate to toot our own horn around these parts, but this must be said: apparently I’m kind of a big deal on Google+

which is really rather amusing, considering I’ve been banned twice in two days and am still banned. Nonetheless, here’s what my stats look like today:

ReferrerView

sGoogle168

google.co.uk50

google.ca17

google.com.au8

StumbleUpon8

google.com.br8

gawker.com8

google.ro7

google.nl6

google.no4

Meaning that even though I can’t do my usual self-promotional link-dropping, and all my existing droppings have been mopped up from the Goog, other people are spreading my droppings all over the horizon. It’s kinda like Farmville, only I WIN!

And as to why I’ve been banned twice, that’s easy. I’m raincoaster, right? Over five million blog readers have encountered me as raincoaster, so when I started up in G+ I started as “rain coaster.” Now, I wasn’t stupid; the rules clearly say you MUST identify yourself by your real name, so I opened the account not from raincoaster at gmail dot com but from real.name at gmail dot com, and in the space provided for “other names” I put Real Name. I mean, why would you HAVE that space if you weren’t allowed to have more than one name, right? Or as this very wise person put it:

I actually got clipped by Google a week ago due to using the name CZ Unit. Which was interesting, since they asked me to use the name I am commonly known by.

I had to explain over the course of a week that my friends know me as CZ, family knows me as CZ, people in real life know me as CZ. I even asked my friends “What name pops into your mind when you think about me”? “What name do you call me when you see me across a room”

In both cases (and others) the results were unanimous: CZ. Even the person who turned me in used to call me CZ back in 1987 (yes, I have the NextMail with voice attachment

I had to point them to my LJ (cz-unit), something I have been keeping since 2002. 3,000 posts; probably not a sock puppet.

I had to have my friends send emails of support and they were even having notarized letters signed on my behalf saying that they knew me as CZ and only as CZ.

And I had to scan in a copy of my lunch bag as evidence that yes: My wife even writes “CZ’s Lunch” on my bag. What more positive, tangible ID would one need?

All of this brings up two points: First is who defines a person? Is it your parents? Your Job? The Government? Google? Your friends? You?

Second is just how wise is it to outsource your friend support network? I was on G+ for a week when I got clipped, and I still have my LJ as a backup. How about people who don’t have that? What are they going to do when their network vanishes due to upsetting the provider?

Very interesting stuff. I wrote about it on my LJ, it has been an interesting experience. But it does help me to answer the age old question:

“Who Am I?”

That’s a very, very wise post. My own experience was a little less profound, since I’m used to dealing with this question All the Damn Time.

The first time I was banned, there was no notification at all, and if someone hadn’t posted the direct link to the appeal process in the help forum, I wouldn’t have been able to ask for my account back. Google deleted that helpful forum post, by the way. Why, if they don’t want to be evil? It asked for links to places I was mentioned as “raincoaster,” and they had to be along the lines of registered accounts at Google-owned sites like YouTube or media mentions, that kinda thing. I gave them this list (stalkers, here’s your dream material!):

http://facebook.com/raincoaster
http://www.linkedin.com/in/raincoaster
https://twitter.com/#!/raincoaster
http://www.flickr.com/people/raincoaster/
http://www.facebook.com/raincoastermedia
http://empireavenue.com/RAINCOASTER
http://www.wordcampvictoria.ca/2010/04/featured-speaker-raincoaster/
http://en.forums.wordpress.com/profile/raincoaster
http://www.peerindex.net/raincoaster
http://ahamedia.ca/category/raincoaster-media/
http://gawker.com/people/raincoaster5/
http://1st.shortyawards.com/category/raincoaster
http://trueslant.com/people/raincoaster/
http://www.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/vol4_3/v4-3-article70-raincoaster.html
http://www.surveymagnet.com/2011/01/lolebrity-interview/

raincoaster is a god

http://www.mainwriter.com/2010/02/09/questions-over-lunch-with-lorraine-murphy-raincoaster/
http://lanyrd.com/2011/northern-voice/speakers/

Vancouver Blogger Profile: Lorraine Murphy

http://emmerogers.com/tag/raincoaster/
http://carocat.co.uk/2009/08/14/twitlight-who-are-you-raincoaster/

 

Is that enough, Google??? IS IT??? For god’s sake, the LinkedIn and Facebook vanity links are “raincoaster.”

Google emailed me after I filled in the form to tell me that changing my name from “rain coaster” to what I had on my LinkedIn Profile would be acceptable. My LinkedIn profile says “Real (raincoaster) Name,” so that’s what I did (subbing in quotation marks for parenthesis). Last night, they suspended my account AGAIN.

I guess something like 20 links is still not enough?

When are they gonna suspend Xeni Jardin, who also isn’t using her birth name?

And, as women are disproportionate users of pseudonyms (for “what are you wearing, baby” issues), this has become a gender issue. Yeah, I know it’s old skool and boring to call out sexism, but even if that was not the intention, that has been the result.

Don’t be evil. Bitches.

The Pirate Party, me Hearties!

Posted on by
And you should have seen the Swedish Pirate After-Party!

And you should have seen the Swedish Pirate After-Party!

Party on, dudes!

Also: I just thought we needed something other than a video for once on this page. Also also, I’m freaking pissed at YouTube. A video I posted to Gawker.tv yesterday and was working fine today at 11am was “Embedding disabled” by 4pm today. Motherfuckers. In the words of the immortal Jack Burton, sonofabitch must pay. At which point I am tempted to insert a video, but will resist.