Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page
NOR RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS CONTENT”.

End Quote

Google owns Blogger.com. Has Tim O’Reilly contacted Google with the section of his proposed code that must (by ipso facto) also apply to the platform as well as the blog administrator?

In an interview with Wired on Friday (13th) to promote his latest web 2.0 conference,O’Reilly said: “I’ve come to think the call for a code of conduct was a bit misguided.” The admission came two days after a post on his Radar blog entitled “Code of Conduct: Lessons Learned So Far”. In it he wrote: “I was proposing a modular set of terms of service, so somebody could say, ‘I don’t want this kind of behaviour.’ Now, a lot of people already do that, so it’s really much ado about nothing.”

Despite coming to the above conclusion, The O’Reilly Saga continues in his comments section with commenters posting ridiculous off-topic subjects and stupid Youtube links. O’Reilly says he knows the person who attacked Kathy Sierra. He gets the victim and the perpetrator together on CNN – then somebody pumps up the NY Times publicity machinery for both the victim and the perpetrator. It doesn’t take a genius to see who may be benefiting from this little fracas.

Then O’Reilly starts blaming a random responder (Lessons Learned So Far) as being one of the attackers…and…he’s started deleting and prioritising the “best” replies, ones that mirror his opinions, which are severely lacking in substance. So, the entire “Lessons Learned So Far” thread must be accessed and read from the Google cached copy.

When bloggers respond from their websites,the sources seem to have been obliterated once the post is published – most of the track backs lead to O’Reilly’s Radar Website – and (duh! – as an Internet expert!) he is unaware that there are persistent error messages generated in his responders’ posts, so that it becomes a hit and miss game whether the post actually gets published or not.

Perhaps Tim’s involvement relates to this little gem.

Sierra’s current gig, along with her partner Bert Bates, is
developing and producing the bizarre new Head First series of books for O’Reilly.

Proud to be Anonymous

The Kathy Sierra business needs closer examination because I think something might be getting overlooked. Kathy Sierra published the IP number on her website

http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2007/03/as_i_typ e_this_.html

of the alleged perpetrator of these threats that turned out to be someone using an ISP in Madrid, Spain (according to the IP number)

Once the victim, Kathy Sierra, collected the evidence of a crime against her, she purportedly sent it to the Police, whereupon it should have been subject to secrecy on the grounds that the perpetrator wouldn’t get a fair trial if the details were made public. And what happens next? The whole scenario is sent to the New York Times, CNN, the BBC and many other minor news outlets. This seems to prove that there’s NO EVIDENCE of any CRIME having been committed against Kathy Sierra or anybody else. It would be logical to express ones anguish to the world if one had been stabbed. But without seeing the blood, the story remains fictitious.

BY PUBLISHING the IP number of the perpetrator Kathy Sierra has probably inadvertently stalled any further investigations into the crime. I don’t suppose she has even been given a crime number and I suspect the Law Enforcement Officers concerned pointed out that there is a delete button on her computer.

BY PUBLISHING THE IP number of the alleged perpetrator of a crime, she has committed a crime herself.

wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address (http)

IP address legality in Europe

It is important that this significant difference in legal status be understood, because Websites that provide for third-party interception of IP addressing information and Traffic Data, without website visitor consent, are committing a criminal offence in the UK by virtue of the regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, where through the requirements of European Council Decision 2005/222/JHA, such Website owners face serious sanctions, including the winding up of their businesses, being debarred from running a business and more than 2 years imprisonment.

P T B Anonymous

“Please be civil and polite.”

If someone chooses not be be civil and polite, then simply delete their comments. Your blog is your domain, you control the atmosphere. We should consider that our purpose for leaving comments is to enhance the conversation. To do this, one should make their case for their own viewpoints, instead of attacking the writer as a person. Improving our knowledge on a particular topic, and perhaps our vocabulary, increases the likelihood of polite and civil conversation.

http://jergames.blogspot.com/2007/03/blogger-code-of-ethics.html

Yehuda