More on the annoying bill
Michele has more on the bill that bans annoyance on the internet (i.e., it doesn’t). She notes that the bill was taken out of context and that the version being quoted is an older (by two years) version of the bill. In short, the news source screwed the pooch and we bloggers ran with it.
I still disagree that the purpose of the language quoted was to deal with cyberstalking. I think it was to apply the same rules as standard phones to internet telephone. Of course, that may be what congress thinks cyberstalking is.
Additionally, she didn’t have a very happy SayUncle experience. She writes:
So what do you think happened when this itty bitty blogger tried to correct the record and point out the erroneous information? Well, lets just say I got some less than civil guests that wound up in my inbox, and I’ve spent close to an hour getting rid of them. Thank God for delete buttons. Unfortunately, contrary to their misguided belief, there’s not a darned thing I can do about that. Nope, according to the legislation their has to be at minimum, “substantial harassment”, at the maximum there has to be a level of consistent threat “to kill, injure, harass, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person in another State”.
Sorry you had a bad experience but odds are that the emails you got didn’t come from a reader here. See, the comments section here (as a favor to commenters) doesn’t display email addresses. I gave her page a quick glance (including searching the code for a mailto tag) and found no email contact info there. And commenters here, though direct and sometimes smarmy, are usually quite civil. That’s something I’m rather proud of, actually. I don’t think they’d send you nasty emails even if they had access to your email address, which they don’t. I doubt those emails were the result of a comment left here. As such, I find the accusation baseless.
That said, if any of you guys did send her nasty emails, that’s not nice.