Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
I'm OK with the DMCA.
Sure 0%

Votes: 0

 First Diary

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Nov 27, 2001
Wow, my first diary entry. This is cool.

[ED by elenchos: The body of this diary was removed because it was, in part, a bunch of gibberish, and in the rest, a false claim as to the legal status of the gibberish. Please read the Terms of Service carefully, and remember that trolling is not tolerated here at Thank you.]


More diaries by totalandcomplete
I'm BAAAAACK! (aka The Toad Enlightenment Hour)


elenchos: (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by tkatchev on Wed Nov 28th, 2001 at 12:01:37 AM PST
You are treading on slippery ground here. A bit more, and you'll be sucked into the Troll Maelstrom. You'll be left standing at the side-roads of life, with nothing left to do except gain mild amusement by posting distended-anus pictures to

Check yourself; stop before it is too late! It can happen to anyone. Step outside, go take a walk in your neighborhood park; there is "real life" outside your window. Please watch youself. (I'm posting purely out of concern for your well-being.)

Peace and much love...

Oh, Tkatchev! (none / 0) (#5)
by RobotSlave on Wed Nov 28th, 2001 at 12:47:36 AM PST
Such brazen vanity, it is so endearing!

Please, continue to post as though no-one could ever be on to you.

© 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

The Censorship (none / 0) (#7)
by totalandcomplete on Sat Dec 1st, 2001 at 10:46:20 PM PST
TOS violation, eh? Well, let's see then.

" gives permission for its servers to be accessed by HTTP clients specifically designed to represent the logical structure of the served documents in a user readable format, or by mail transport agents legitimately transporting email relevant to the site. Protocol handshake information generated by our servers in a network transaction with your computer and client program, including but not limited to HTTP headers or SMTP handshakes, are Copyright (C) 2001; disclosure of the contents of such protocol exchanges is strictly forbidden."

No violation, yet. Let's read on.

"The HTML source to our web pages is also Copyright (C) 2001, and is only licensed to you for the purposes of reading and responding to content, not for direct examination of said HTML source. Disclosure of the HTML source of any page beyond the perusal of article and comment content is strictly forbidden."

Again, no violation, yet. Continuing...

"Any means of accessing which violates these permissions, including but not limited to telnet access to any port, port scans, operating system detection programs, or any client or client feature specifically designed to display HTTP header information in a normal network transaction with our servers, or to display or store the physical structure of the HTML documents served (as opposed to generating a user-visible display out of the logical structure), are access control circumvention devices and thus not allowed under the provisions of the DMCA. Use of such devices on our site shall constitute unauthorized access (a.k.a. "hacking"). An examples of such client devices is the wget program, which is by design does not display protocol information nor render the HTML document for user consumption, or the "Display Source" feature of Web browsers."

Still, no violation, yet. But wait, here's something.

"Also, we reserve the right to remove comments deemed inappropriate in tone, factually false, or in violation of laws. We recognize this is an extreme measure, and will thus apply it sparingly."

For those who haven't read my post before the Censorship took place, it was a piece of encrypted text prefaced by the statement that it was protected by the U.S. Digital Millenium Copyright Act. The editors deleted it for the stated reason that "it was gibberish", which it was clearly not, and because of "a false claim as to the legal status". Unless the editor in question happens to be a lawyer, which I doubt, he can not accurately make that statement.
Therefore, what has happened here is censorship, pure and simple. The original post was not "inappropriate in tone, factually false, or in violation of laws". The only logical conclusion is censorship. I don't pretend to know why this was really done, nor do I give an unwashed rat's ass. I will then require the editors to restore my original post to the way it was intended to be presented. I will also require an apology by the editors for the censorship and a promise not to let it happen again.

Copyright 2001, totalandcomplete. Any unauthorized use of this post, as a whole or in part, is prohibited. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest e


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to