Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 14th Jan 2012 20:57 UTC
Internet & Networking The Obama administration has responded to two petitions regarding SOPA, but in true political fashion, the response is 838 words of absolutely nothing at all. Here's a link, but don't complain to me about losing 10 minutes of your life reading this empty drivel. How about taking a stand for once, eh?
Thread beginning with comment 503558
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Excuse me, but...
by lucas_maximus on Sun 15th Jan 2012 17:04 UTC in reply to "Excuse me, but..."
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

Thom is yet again being dramatic, and he has seemed to miss the bit,

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/obama-administratio...

They said the White House cannot support legislation that "drives users to dangerous, unreliable DNS servers and puts next-generation security policies, such as the deployment of DNSSEC, at risk." Both PIPA and SOPA would do exactly that.


So it does seem they are actually against it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Excuse me, but...
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 15th Jan 2012 19:57 in reply to "RE: Excuse me, but..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Why don't you read the thing for yourself instead of relying on third parties?

Anybody with even a dime of undersanding about politics (and I have a very deep interest in the politics of my own country as well as that of the US, as I follow US politics closely) knows this is an empty statement. Nwhere does it say they are against anything. No stand is taken. No point is made. It's just meaningless jibber-jabber to appease everyone.

Incredible how people fall for this. In The Netherlands, you'd lose voters over non-statements like this.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Excuse me, but...
by umccullough on Sun 15th Jan 2012 20:07 in reply to "RE[2]: Excuse me, but..."
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

Incredible how people fall for this. In The Netherlands, you'd lose voters over non-statements like this.


Welcome to U.S. politics - here you just have to associate with one of the two major parties in power and you're likely to win.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Excuse me, but...
by modmans2ndcoming on Sun 15th Jan 2012 23:58 in reply to "RE[2]: Excuse me, but..."
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Thom.... it says what they are against in BOLD in the damn statement.

They do not have to say "we are against SOPA" since they are against all that is ACTUALLY BAD about SOPA and PIPA.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Excuse me, but...
by lucas_maximus on Mon 16th Jan 2012 04:24 in reply to "RE[2]: Excuse me, but..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I did read it myself. However they explained it better than I, thus I quoted and gave the source.

It is normal believe it or not, to quote someone else when you think they can explain something better than yourself. I believe you have done it yourself as well.

I dunno, whenever I wrote a report at University, it wasn't frowned upon to give a quote with the actual reference material, preferably using Harvard Referencing System.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Excuse me, but...
by SterlingNorth on Thu 19th Jan 2012 11:12 in reply to "RE[2]: Excuse me, but..."
SterlingNorth Member since:
2006-02-21

Given those 838 words were enough to piss off all of Obama's (now-ex) Hollywood donors, I pretty much think your analysis was absolutely wrong on this, Thom. Those 838 words seem to have said plenty enough.

http://www.deadline.com/2012/01/exclusive-hollywood-moguls-stopping...

Reply Parent Score: 1