Oh My My CBC has apparently allowed a comment that must have been blocked earlier in order to bury my comment about the creation of this blog. I created this blog at about the time that CBC took down the most popular comment string that I and many others were registering our indignation towards CBC's very unethical moderation of their website. I know for a fact that I complained of that malicious action immediately byway of my Twitter account and it wasn't long that that particular comment section reappeared. Several others commented about the strange disappearance of the string as soon as it reappeared. Clearly CBC has blocked many of my comments in the past. Their actions raise the obvious question as who else has been blocked by CBC over the years and what were those folks trying to reveal to their fellow Canadian taxpayers who finance this malicious action of a CROWN Corp for the benefit of their political paymasters no matter who held a governmental mandate?
Whereas I had complained of CBC's political antics against me for the the past 14 years within my lawsuit before Federal Court (file no T-1557-15) while I was running in the election 42nd Parliament, I began to save all my PUBLIC interactions the CROWN Corp commonly known as CBC/Radio Canada.
Before you doubt my last statement check page 14 of this old file I created before I ran for seat in in the 39th Parliament..
Trust that CBC had received true copies of my two lawsuits in the USA 2 years before I ran in the election of the 38th Parliament. If you wish to know more read what remains of an old blog of mine that Scotty Baby Agnew formerly Master of Disaster in the IRVING Media Empire in New Brunswick could not manage to make GOOGLE delete. IRVING'S evil wishes were not obliged by GOOGLE'S lawyers because I had not allowed BLOGGER to merge my account when they sold out to GOOGLE..Hence at least this blog still exists and gets some very interesting visitors to the very day. Need I say CBC in particular?
http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
http://www.sitemeter.com/?a=stats&s=s29motomaniac&r=89
Just Dave
By Location > Visit Detail
Visit 24,119
| [<<] [>>] | |||||||||||||||||
| Domain Name | cbc.ca ? (Canada) | ||||||||||||||||
| IP Address | 159.33.10.# (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) | ||||||||||||||||
| ISP | Canadian Broadcasting Corporation | ||||||||||||||||
| Location |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Language | English (U.K.) en-gb | ||||||||||||||||
| Operating System | Macintosh WinNT | ||||||||||||||||
| Browser | Safari 1.3 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/53.0.2785.116 Safari/537.36 | ||||||||||||||||
| Javascript | version 1.5 | ||||||||||||||||
| Monitor |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Time of Visit | Sep 20 2016 11:08:58 am | ||||||||||||||||
| Last Page View | Sep 20 2016 11:08:58 am | ||||||||||||||||
| Visit Length | 0 seconds | ||||||||||||||||
| Page Views | 1 | ||||||||||||||||
| Referring URL | https://www.google.ca/ | ||||||||||||||||
| Visit Entry Page | http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/ | ||||||||||||||||
| Visit Exit Page | http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/ | ||||||||||||||||
| Out Click | |||||||||||||||||
| Time Zone | UTC-4:00 | ||||||||||||||||
| Visitor's Time | Sep 20 2016 11:08:58 am | ||||||||||||||||
| Visit Number | 24,119 | ||||||||||||||||
The instant CBC denied my name was on the ballot again in Fundy Royal two days before polling day. I registered with CBC in my true name and read them the riot act within the comment section. See for yourself.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/fundy-royal-riding-profile-1.3274276
This is the file I created not long after the comment section closed yesterday,
https://www.scribd.com/document/325143014/The-Shady-Secretive-System-of-CBC
Now go to CBC
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/government-surveillance-rules-rcmp-csis-1.3769014
and compare the comments within this string in particular
Malachi Constant
"One was granted to CSIS retroactively."
CSIS breaking the law? Again?
@Malachi Constant
Channeling Nixon, "When CSIS / RCMP does it, it's not illegal."
LOL
Channeling Nixon, "When CSIS / RCMP does it, it's not illegal."
LOL
@Malachi Constant
Not the first time Harper passed retroactive laws to absolve those who already committed a crime.
Not the first time Harper passed retroactive laws to absolve those who already committed a crime.
@Alex Johnston
The Conservative government Minister had to approve it first.
The Conservative government Minister had to approve it first.
@Malachi Constant
What else are they to do in a 1.2 billion dollar building with a 3 billion dollar operating budget?
What else are they to do in a 1.2 billion dollar building with a 3 billion dollar operating budget?
@Malachi Constant That was Harper, he made it retroactive to cover the RCMP's illegal activities.
@Alex Johnston I suspect that
you are not the Governor General's daughterwho is also the lawyer CBC
hired to fix things in the comment section. However just in case you are
I must ask an obvious questions.
1. When will CBC ever learn that I save everything the instant I post it then create a pdf file later as I blog and Tweet about it as well as send you an email to register my indignation?.
2. Don't you think people notice when you delete the most popular comment stings that I happen to post within?
3. Never mind Mean Old Me for a minute. What about all the other people who were not malicious Trolls who also commented? Are we not the taxpayers who pay your wages?
1. When will CBC ever learn that I save everything the instant I post it then create a pdf file later as I blog and Tweet about it as well as send you an email to register my indignation?.
2. Don't you think people notice when you delete the most popular comment stings that I happen to post within?
3. Never mind Mean Old Me for a minute. What about all the other people who were not malicious Trolls who also commented? Are we not the taxpayers who pay your wages?
@Malachi Constant
The big question is: "How many years, retroactively?"
The big question is: "How many years, retroactively?"
@Malachi Constant
Not if the law provides for them to obtain permission from government.
Not if the law provides for them to obtain permission from government.
@Malcolm Alexander How dare
you address the Lawyer/Governor General's daughter in such a fashion?.
Be careful that you wind up like Mean Old Me and the lawyer hired to
fix the comment section edits your comments out of CBC's domain :)
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/09/the-shady-secretive-system-of-cbc.html
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/09/the-shady-secretive-system-of-cbc.html
Gerrit Deppe
@Malachi Constant Laws seem
to be for us little people under the yolk of lawless do-what-they-want
MegaCorporations and their helpers the Mainstream Media.
@Gerrit Deppe
Yolk?
You have egg on your face.
Yolk?
You have egg on your face.
@Malachi Constant Still.
@David Raymond Amos Been there done that... LULZ
I have records too, despite their trying to fry some old puters I used to use. backups never go online and are not wireless so there is that. Plus I show EVERYBODY.
I have records too, despite their trying to fry some old puters I used to use. backups never go online and are not wireless so there is that. Plus I show EVERYBODY.
Content disabled.
@Alex Johnston Whereas you
are a lawyer just like your Daddy the Governor General, you must have at
least two clues between the two of you. Correct? I have sent you and
your CBC bosses more than enough emails since you introduced yourself to
me in order to tell me that I must re-register with CBC with my true
name again. Have I not? What was the point of the exercise if my
comments are still blocked anyway? So did your or your politically
appointed Daddy bother to read even one email I sent to you? BTW For the
record I believe I still recall what CBC reported your Daddy said to
Harper just before they entered Rideau Hall in order for him to be sworn
in a Governor General. You Daddy said "Whatever Works" Correct?
FYI Everybody and his dog knows I crossed paths with your Daddy when he set up the the barriers for Oliphant to follow in order to protect Mulroney from prosecution.
That said now that your cohorts in CBC and Viafoura continue to block my comments, I am compelled ask another 3 rather obvious questions that you unethical CBC people will no doubt block as well but folks will nevertheless review elsewhere. N'esy Pas?
1. Did you bother to discuss with your Daddy or his minions in the RCMP and CSIS about the not so secret things Judge Richard Bell found in the docket of Federal Court (File no T-1557-15) and discussed with me on the PUBLIC RECORD on December 14th, 2015?
https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug
2. Did you or your Daddy even read Judge Richard Bell's decision that Federal Court FAILED to publish just like the other four in the matter thus far?
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/09/docket-t-1557-15-judge-b-richard-bell.html
3 What would you or your Daddy do if you were I ???
Veritas Vincit
David Raymond Amos
FYI Everybody and his dog knows I crossed paths with your Daddy when he set up the the barriers for Oliphant to follow in order to protect Mulroney from prosecution.
That said now that your cohorts in CBC and Viafoura continue to block my comments, I am compelled ask another 3 rather obvious questions that you unethical CBC people will no doubt block as well but folks will nevertheless review elsewhere. N'esy Pas?
1. Did you bother to discuss with your Daddy or his minions in the RCMP and CSIS about the not so secret things Judge Richard Bell found in the docket of Federal Court (File no T-1557-15) and discussed with me on the PUBLIC RECORD on December 14th, 2015?
https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug
2. Did you or your Daddy even read Judge Richard Bell's decision that Federal Court FAILED to publish just like the other four in the matter thus far?
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/09/docket-t-1557-15-judge-b-richard-bell.html
3 What would you or your Daddy do if you were I ???
Veritas Vincit
David Raymond Amos
David Raymond Amos
@Dave MacKenzie Me too I made a blog about this
@Malachi Constant CSIS was ordered to spy on environmentalists.
Burnaby Granny taking pictures of aging oil tanks questioned by RCMP
Burnaby Granny taking pictures of aging oil tanks questioned by RCMP
@Malachi Constant Harper
used CSIS for a private corporation to monitor environmental groups and
people who oppose the government and protest (and other countries'
energy sector) for private gain. Environmental agencies were being
targeted for audits. Then to top it off, the Harper-appointed spy agency
watch dog was also an Enbridge lobbyist. He stepped down once this
information came to light.
Canada’s spy agency watchdog worked as Enbridge lobbyist while CSIS was monitoring environmental and First Nations groups that opposed the Northern Gateway pipeline:
“Chuck Strahl steps down as spy watchdog amid lobbying questions”
Canada’s spy agency watchdog worked as Enbridge lobbyist while CSIS was monitoring environmental and First Nations groups that opposed the Northern Gateway pipeline:
“Chuck Strahl steps down as spy watchdog amid lobbying questions”
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/chuck-strahl-steps-down-as-spy-watchdog-amid-lobbying-questions-1.2510321
Canadian spies met with energy firms, documents reveal
At the most recent meeting in May 2013, which focused on "security of energy resources development", meals were sponsored by Enbridge, a Canadian oil company trying to win approval for controversial tar sands pipelines.
Canadian spies met with energy firms, documents reveal
At the most recent meeting in May 2013, which focused on "security of energy resources development", meals were sponsored by Enbridge, a Canadian oil company trying to win approval for controversial tar sands pipelines.
This is an email to Alex Johnston and her cohorts about this blog about the CBC website can be found right here
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/09/attn-alex-johnston-i-just-left-message.html
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/government-surveillance-rules-rcmp-csis-1.3769014
@Rob Lehtisaari FYI I did
call Viafoura and asked two sneaky dudes about who moderates the
comments. They both played as dumb as posts just like CBC's lawyers
always do. Hell they would not even tell me who their CEO or their
lawyer were. So I called the personal number of their boss Jesse "The
Mountain Climbing" Dude and left him a blistering voicemail. Then I
sent another email to the CBC hierarchy and some other unethical so
called "Journalists" and published it in my blog immediately as per my
MO. Then I made few more calls to people that actually tried to listen
to my rant against a very corrupt system financed by the taxpayer.
However my connection was bad so I gave up
@Malcolm Alexander How dare
you address the Lawyer/Governor General's daughter in such a fashion?.
Be careful that you wind up like Mean Old Me and the lawyer hired to
fix the comment section edits your comments out of CBC's domain :)
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/09/the-shady-secretive-system-of-cbc.html
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/09/the-shady-secretive-system-of-cbc.html
@Dwight Williams HMMM Now the
plot thickens. Seems that your comment thread is back However my
comment showing the letter form Minister Joly to Mean Old Me has been
edited out. It begs the obvious who else got edited out? Shame on CBC
you people do know I already blogged about your malicious nonsense.
Correct?
Content disabled.
@Kat Burd And what sort of
Troll are you oh ye who has an ID I don't believe? However judging from
your comment I suspect that you and perhaps Captain Kirk would agree
with the letter I got this year from the Lawyer/Space Cadet Minister
Joly N'esy Pas???
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/07/reply-to-david-raymond-amos-from.html
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/07/reply-to-david-raymond-amos-from.html
'Shady, secretive system': Public Safety green-lit RCMP, CSIS spying devices, documents reveal
Government officials refuse to say exactly what interception devices are being approved in Canada
By Laura Wright, CBC News
Posted: Sep 22, 2016 5:00 AM ET
The government won't say exactly what technologies it
allows police and CSIS to use for covert surveillance in Canada.
(Reuters)
Laura Wright
Public Safety Canada has repeatedly approved CSIS and
the RCMP's use of devices to spy on Canadians' communications, documents
obtained by CBC News reveal.
Canadians have been kept largely in the dark about police and intelligence agencies' surveillance capabilities. But recent revelations in a Montreal court case that police are using electronic tools to scoop up mobile phone signals have prompted some experts to call for greater transparency in the approval and use of technologies that potentially violate privacy.
The new documents reveal Public Safety Canada approved requests from the RCMP, Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Defence Department granting more than a dozen licences to an unnamed company (or companies) for the purpose of possessing, manufacturing or selling devices "used primarily for the interception of communications."
"It's a part of the puzzle," Rubin said. "There are too many questions there. All I've uncovered is a link to how this rather shady, secretive system works, and there's no public understanding of it."
They were granted under Section 191 of the Criminal Code, which says technology for the surreptitious interception of private communications is illegal, unless permission to use such technology is granted by the public safety minister.
The RCMP wouldn't disclose what the licences are for.
"We generally do not comment on specific investigative methods, tools and techniques outside of court," said spokeswoman Cpl. Annie Delisle.
Public Safety Canada spokesman Jean-Philippe Levert also declined to identify the devices.
"Disclosing details such as the specific types of equipment used to conduct investigations may hinder these agencies' effectiveness and their ability to carry out their mandates," he said.
CSIS didn't reply to CBC's request for comment.
In one case, Public Safety Canada retroactively granted a licence request from CSIS for a device 'used primarily for the interception of communications.' (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)
Delisle said the RCMP has been appointed to review all licence
applications made under Section 191, including doing background checks
on the individuals or companies that apply. If they pass the RCMP's
vetting process, Public Safety officials are then asked to sign off on
the licences.
Some, called "special licences," last for two years. The RCMP said this type allows a company to possess the equipment, which is otherwise illegal to own. The licensee can then demonstrate the equipment to law enforcement and government agencies.
Others are just called "licences" and last for one year. The RCMP said this allows a company to sell the equipment to the government agency that sponsored its application.
While Public Safety and the RCMP won't identify the devices, Rubin says one possibility is what's known as a StingRay, or IMSI catcher. The device can identify and track a person based on their mobile device's specific ID and intercept communications to and from the device.
But RCMP testimony and court records from a Montreal case show the RCMP does use the technology in investigations across the country. In that court case, it was revealed that police had sought a judge's authorization to use the device
"It could be any kind of device — it certainly doesn't have to be the StingRay — but who knows what this device is, and that's part of the problem," Rubin said.
Tamir Israel, a privacy lawyer who co-authored a recent report on IMSI catchers, said there are lots of invasive electronic devices out there that police can use.
Especially since the government introduced legislation this summer to create a spy watchdog committee, and Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale said he wants to hear from Canadians on the topic.
But without more transparency, both Rubin and Israel say that's a challenge.
"We're having these consultations, but we don't know what we're consulting about because we don't know about what the tools are that are being used," Israel said.
So theoretically, according to Israel, anyone using such a device would need both a licence from Public Safety and authorization from Innovation Canada.
But that isn't the case for the RCMP and other public officials.
Innovation Canada confirmed that it would have to authorize a person or company to own and use a device like an IMSI catcher. But the department says it hasn't authorized their use in Canada.
However, a spokesperson did say that under Section 54 of the Radiocommunications Regulations, it doesn't actually have to be notified if a public official, peace officer, prosecutor, or officer of the court uses such a device for the investigation of an alleged crime, or for the purposes of international affairs, national defence or security.
That means Innovation Canada only regulates their use for the rest of us, which may explain how the RCMP has been able to use the device in its investigations.
"And now that we know it exists, how are you going to explain this to the public?"
View the documents released under Access to Information below:
Canadians have been kept largely in the dark about police and intelligence agencies' surveillance capabilities. But recent revelations in a Montreal court case that police are using electronic tools to scoop up mobile phone signals have prompted some experts to call for greater transparency in the approval and use of technologies that potentially violate privacy.
The new documents reveal Public Safety Canada approved requests from the RCMP, Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Defence Department granting more than a dozen licences to an unnamed company (or companies) for the purpose of possessing, manufacturing or selling devices "used primarily for the interception of communications."
- Cellphone monitoring device use should be transparent and limited, researchers say
- Goodale hopes new spy oversight committee will be 'spontaneous' with reports
"It's a part of the puzzle," Rubin said. "There are too many questions there. All I've uncovered is a link to how this rather shady, secretive system works, and there's no public understanding of it."
Government won't identify devices
The one- and two-year licences were issued beginning in 2015, and in some cases, they extend until 2018. One was granted to CSIS retroactively.They were granted under Section 191 of the Criminal Code, which says technology for the surreptitious interception of private communications is illegal, unless permission to use such technology is granted by the public safety minister.
The RCMP wouldn't disclose what the licences are for.
"We generally do not comment on specific investigative methods, tools and techniques outside of court," said spokeswoman Cpl. Annie Delisle.
Public Safety Canada spokesman Jean-Philippe Levert also declined to identify the devices.
"Disclosing details such as the specific types of equipment used to conduct investigations may hinder these agencies' effectiveness and their ability to carry out their mandates," he said.
CSIS didn't reply to CBC's request for comment.
In one case, Public Safety Canada retroactively granted a licence request from CSIS for a device 'used primarily for the interception of communications.' (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)
Some, called "special licences," last for two years. The RCMP said this type allows a company to possess the equipment, which is otherwise illegal to own. The licensee can then demonstrate the equipment to law enforcement and government agencies.
Others are just called "licences" and last for one year. The RCMP said this allows a company to sell the equipment to the government agency that sponsored its application.
While Public Safety and the RCMP won't identify the devices, Rubin says one possibility is what's known as a StingRay, or IMSI catcher. The device can identify and track a person based on their mobile device's specific ID and intercept communications to and from the device.
- Police secrecy on StingRay cellphone surveillance device challenged
- Are StingRay cellphone surveillance systems used by Vancouver police?
- Edmonton police backtrack on StringRay surveillance statement
But RCMP testimony and court records from a Montreal case show the RCMP does use the technology in investigations across the country. In that court case, it was revealed that police had sought a judge's authorization to use the device
No public record
There is no public record or clear policy on how police use technology for surveillance purposes, something privacy advocates say is a problem."It could be any kind of device — it certainly doesn't have to be the StingRay — but who knows what this device is, and that's part of the problem," Rubin said.
Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale has said
he wants Canadians to weigh in on security and privacy issues in
Canada. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)
- Former CSIS head says Canada should have its own cyber-warriors
- MPs, senators to oversee security, intelligence agencies under new Liberal bill
Especially since the government introduced legislation this summer to create a spy watchdog committee, and Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale said he wants to hear from Canadians on the topic.
But without more transparency, both Rubin and Israel say that's a challenge.
"We're having these consultations, but we don't know what we're consulting about because we don't know about what the tools are that are being used," Israel said.
Exemptions for public officials
Adding to the confusion is the fact any device that interferes with radio communications, such as an IMSI catcher, requires a company or agency to get authorization from Innovation, Sciences and Economic Development Canada, previously known as Industry Canada.
CSIS, the RCMP and Public Safety Canada
wouldn't identify the devices that required licences. One possibility is
IMSI catchers. (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office/Associated Press)
But that isn't the case for the RCMP and other public officials.
Innovation Canada confirmed that it would have to authorize a person or company to own and use a device like an IMSI catcher. But the department says it hasn't authorized their use in Canada.
However, a spokesperson did say that under Section 54 of the Radiocommunications Regulations, it doesn't actually have to be notified if a public official, peace officer, prosecutor, or officer of the court uses such a device for the investigation of an alleged crime, or for the purposes of international affairs, national defence or security.
That means Innovation Canada only regulates their use for the rest of us, which may explain how the RCMP has been able to use the device in its investigations.
- Police secrecy on StingRay cellphone surveillance device challenged
- Canada's electronic spy service to take more prominent role in ISIS fight
"And now that we know it exists, how are you going to explain this to the public?"
View the documents released under Access to Information below:
By submitting a comment, you accept that CBC has the right to reproduce and publish that comment in whole or in part, in any manner CBC chooses. Please note that CBC does not endorse the opinions expressed in comments. Comments on this story are moderated according to our Submission Guidelines. Comments are welcome while open. We reserve the right to close comments at any time.
Dear CBC,
Your attempts to encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations has failed, as has your measure to require posters to use 'real sounding' usernames. Unless Captain Kirk has been fooling me all these years and is a real person, along with several cocktails and treats from Timmy's.
Articles in the business and politics sections have been taken over by roboposting astroturfers who have no interest in thought, respect, or conversation, and commenting on those sections should be discontinued immediately and permanently. They use the comments section only for the purpose of disseminating propaganda and manufacturing the appearance of mass public consensus.
There are perhaps two dozen 'posters' which always appear together, who write posts which appear immediately upon comments being allowed, with multiple 'likes' already present when they appear, which rapidly garner more of them using standard astroturfing techniques to advance their cadre of posts to the top of the 'most liked' list. I have watched it in real time with my own eyes several times now over the last few weeks.
Such misuse of the comments section is a violation of the intention of the CBC, and I believe as a member of Friends of the CBC that such misuse should be permanently prevented. I am more than happy to surrender my own right to comment to make it so.« less
Your attempts to encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations has failed, as has your measure to require posters to use 'real sounding' usernames. Unless Captain Kirk has been fooling me all these years and is a real person, along with several cocktails and treats from Timmy's.
Articles in the business and politics sections have been taken over by roboposting astroturfers who have no interest in thought, respect, or conversation, and commenting on those sections should be discontinued immediately and permanently. They use the comments section only for the purpose of disseminating propaganda and manufacturing the appearance of mass public consensus.
There are perhaps two dozen 'posters' which always appear together, who write posts which appear immediately upon comments being allowed, with multiple 'likes' already present when they appear, which rapidly garner more of them using standard astroturfing techniques to advance their cadre of posts to the top of the 'most liked' list. I have watched it in real time with my own eyes several times now over the last few weeks.
Such misuse of the comments section is a violation of the intention of the CBC, and I believe as a member of Friends of the CBC that such misuse should be permanently prevented. I am more than happy to surrender my own right to comment to make it so.« less
@Dwight Williams
I noticed with Cyrus Manz two days ago somehow got 40-60 votes in an hour- with a like generated every 20 seconds or so for 40 minutes. Highly unusual for a post just written, with hundreds of comments already generated. His comment wasn't even all that insightful- just another partisan bait, amidst a board with partisan bait. It looks like the hacks of last year's election cycles are back, but different.
I noticed with Cyrus Manz two days ago somehow got 40-60 votes in an hour- with a like generated every 20 seconds or so for 40 minutes. Highly unusual for a post just written, with hundreds of comments already generated. His comment wasn't even all that insightful- just another partisan bait, amidst a board with partisan bait. It looks like the hacks of last year's election cycles are back, but different.
@Dwight Williams
agree lets reduce it to 1 name per computer.
The tech has been used for years for on line voting on topics that allows just 1 vote even if a person changes names.
Also the likes are like magic . I also watch then jump 5 at a time . I also watch one who post allot numbers go back and forth for 2 minutes . The dislikes turned into likes and in 2 minutes was top liked.
agree lets reduce it to 1 name per computer.
The tech has been used for years for on line voting on topics that allows just 1 vote even if a person changes names.
Also the likes are like magic . I also watch then jump 5 at a time . I also watch one who post allot numbers go back and forth for 2 minutes . The dislikes turned into likes and in 2 minutes was top liked.
@Dwight Williams
Some strange things happen in the CBC comments. Some posters are obviously posting the same position for hours on end. Some seem to always have the same number of likes. Sometimes the comment section is overrun with a particular viewpoint. When world leaders come to visit you cannot comment negatively against them. Someone should use the FOI act to find out why these things happen.
Some strange things happen in the CBC comments. Some posters are obviously posting the same position for hours on end. Some seem to always have the same number of likes. Sometimes the comment section is overrun with a particular viewpoint. When world leaders come to visit you cannot comment negatively against them. Someone should use the FOI act to find out why these things happen.
@Dwight Williams
"They use the comments section only for the purpose of disseminating propaganda and manufacturing the appearance of mass public consensus. "
---------------
I see this too!...not saying you're wrong! many valid points indeed....but the articles themselves are very often the propaganda....do you remember for instance; "Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction" which was pure unadulterated propaganda, being spread to justify an illegal war that killed over a million of what is coldly termed "collateral damage" a propagandist narrative to make it sound like it was bridges and buildings.
Many comments denying the existence of WMD's at that time, were censored or demonized by fellow commenters. Journalists who asked too many questions were also given the option to take early retirement from their MSM jobs.
When lies are the rule, the truth is made to sound very ignorant.
And surveillance, IMO is simply an attempt by sociopaths to play the role of an "all seeing" "self-righteous" GOD that knows everything about everyone....it's the GOD complex incarnate.
Does any one really feel safer from terrorists now??
I believe it's quite the opposite...every time there is a terrorist event , law enforcement is always a dollar short or a day late, in spite of the trillions of tax dollars spent on surveillance.
We've been sold a bridge in the middle of a desert.
This is not my idea of a sane society!...not even close.« less
"They use the comments section only for the purpose of disseminating propaganda and manufacturing the appearance of mass public consensus. "
---------------
I see this too!...not saying you're wrong! many valid points indeed....but the articles themselves are very often the propaganda....do you remember for instance; "Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction" which was pure unadulterated propaganda, being spread to justify an illegal war that killed over a million of what is coldly termed "collateral damage" a propagandist narrative to make it sound like it was bridges and buildings.
Many comments denying the existence of WMD's at that time, were censored or demonized by fellow commenters. Journalists who asked too many questions were also given the option to take early retirement from their MSM jobs.
When lies are the rule, the truth is made to sound very ignorant.
And surveillance, IMO is simply an attempt by sociopaths to play the role of an "all seeing" "self-righteous" GOD that knows everything about everyone....it's the GOD complex incarnate.
Does any one really feel safer from terrorists now??
I believe it's quite the opposite...every time there is a terrorist event , law enforcement is always a dollar short or a day late, in spite of the trillions of tax dollars spent on surveillance.
We've been sold a bridge in the middle of a desert.
This is not my idea of a sane society!...not even close.« less
@Dwight Williams Totally
agree with you, the dislike button is only to show they do not agree
with what has been posted by you. There is no debate only meanness when
others reply. I always wondered about posters they are about 12, I
noticed that basically post close to the same opinion and the same time,
are they the same person under different handles? Also there are some
that just post replies to be just disagreeable and some have this site
up all day. It is sad when people just go looking to be mean to others.
Yes, as far as the names go????« less
@David Allan Way to miss the
point. It's not about participation, it's about integrity. If every
comments section is overrun by bots, then real opinions get missed in
favor of whatever the bot is spewing. that's a matter of CBC policy and
policy enforcement. We don't have the right to comment, but as taxpayers
we do have the right to demand the comments section be managed
correctly.
@Dwight Williams
Now, to disect your diatribe:
"Your attempts to encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations has failed,"
Highly subjective. This is an opinion board.
"as has your measure to require posters to use 'real sounding' usernames"
Agreed on that, pro Islamist opinions from Smith-like user names are completely out of character for the demographic.
"those sections should be discontinued immediately and permanently"
Ridiculous, by any stretch of the imagination.
"I have watched it in real time with my own eyes several times now over the last few weeks"
I, too, have watched pro Liberal comments jump from 0 to 365 likes instantly. It only happens during scandals such as the elbow incident.
"Such misuse of the comments section is a violation of the intention of the CBC"
Pretzel logic here, but for your information, most websites keep comment guidelines as vague as possible to give themselves options.« less
Now, to disect your diatribe:
"Your attempts to encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations has failed,"
Highly subjective. This is an opinion board.
"as has your measure to require posters to use 'real sounding' usernames"
Agreed on that, pro Islamist opinions from Smith-like user names are completely out of character for the demographic.
"those sections should be discontinued immediately and permanently"
Ridiculous, by any stretch of the imagination.
"I have watched it in real time with my own eyes several times now over the last few weeks"
I, too, have watched pro Liberal comments jump from 0 to 365 likes instantly. It only happens during scandals such as the elbow incident.
"Such misuse of the comments section is a violation of the intention of the CBC"
Pretzel logic here, but for your information, most websites keep comment guidelines as vague as possible to give themselves options.« less
@Dwight Williams I agree I
always posted in my real name and CBC blocked my comments Hell I even
ran for public office five times while CBC ignored their mandate in a
VERY partisan fashion and never admitted my name was on the ballots.This
year CBC made me register again and it yet still blocks many of my
comments to this very day. The Lawyer/Space Cadet Minister Joly who
oversees CBC should go figure why Captain Kirk can say anything he
wishes eh?
@Dwight Williams
As a fellow long-time commenter, I'd like to thank you very much for your detailed analysis. It raises many valid points about the CBC Commenting content. I've never found the proper forum to discuss the issue, and glad you raised it.
The reality is the purely bureaucratic CBC approaches to 'controlling' public content has failed. And they were doomed to.
For example, I easily created an extra user account for myself after the implementation of the new system - just to prove it's not viable. And I'm neither a hacker, nor a cybersecurity expert.
I don't and will not use it. Neither will I reveal to anyone how it was done. The point here is merely, and not surprisingly so, that it can be done by an ordinary educated user.
CBC could not and reasonably certainly will not be able to compete with the human creativity in such immensely popular field as IT application in social media. It was a classic bureaucratic disconnect from the reality to decide that a particular mediocre technological / procedural trick can solve a societal problem that is the lack of civility in the public discourse.« less
As a fellow long-time commenter, I'd like to thank you very much for your detailed analysis. It raises many valid points about the CBC Commenting content. I've never found the proper forum to discuss the issue, and glad you raised it.
The reality is the purely bureaucratic CBC approaches to 'controlling' public content has failed. And they were doomed to.
For example, I easily created an extra user account for myself after the implementation of the new system - just to prove it's not viable. And I'm neither a hacker, nor a cybersecurity expert.
I don't and will not use it. Neither will I reveal to anyone how it was done. The point here is merely, and not surprisingly so, that it can be done by an ordinary educated user.
CBC could not and reasonably certainly will not be able to compete with the human creativity in such immensely popular field as IT application in social media. It was a classic bureaucratic disconnect from the reality to decide that a particular mediocre technological / procedural trick can solve a societal problem that is the lack of civility in the public discourse.« less
@Dwight Williams
My own experience mirrors your own. I have watched what used to be an active forum years ago with quite a bit of solid, intelligent debate degraded by partisan hyperbolic nonsense. The names are familiar to anyone that frequents the forums.
The end result is that every article is awash with low level rhetoric and bile that adds nothing to the national conversation. Sadly, it is time for the forums to be euthanized.
My own experience mirrors your own. I have watched what used to be an active forum years ago with quite a bit of solid, intelligent debate degraded by partisan hyperbolic nonsense. The names are familiar to anyone that frequents the forums.
The end result is that every article is awash with low level rhetoric and bile that adds nothing to the national conversation. Sadly, it is time for the forums to be euthanized.
@Dwight Williams
"I am more than happy to surrender my own right to comment to make it so."
Indeed, proving that this shady, secretive system is working - making it so unbearable, to do just that.
Web creator Sir Tim Berners-Lee has warned that the democratic nature of the net is threatened by a "growing tide of surveillance and censorship"
“Bold steps are needed now to protect our fundamental rights to privacy and freedom of opinion and association online.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tim-berners-lee-growing-tide-surveillance-2836461
Our very own laws to 'protect us' are the cause of this dying art of freedom of opinion and association.
Bill C-13 cyber bullying (surveillance)
Bill C-51 - anti terror (censorship)
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/05/22/Canadian-Privacy-Priorities/
We must not surrender our rights at all.« less
"I am more than happy to surrender my own right to comment to make it so."
Indeed, proving that this shady, secretive system is working - making it so unbearable, to do just that.
Web creator Sir Tim Berners-Lee has warned that the democratic nature of the net is threatened by a "growing tide of surveillance and censorship"
“Bold steps are needed now to protect our fundamental rights to privacy and freedom of opinion and association online.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tim-berners-lee-growing-tide-surveillance-2836461
Our very own laws to 'protect us' are the cause of this dying art of freedom of opinion and association.
Bill C-13 cyber bullying (surveillance)
Bill C-51 - anti terror (censorship)
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/05/22/Canadian-Privacy-Priorities/
We must not surrender our rights at all.« less
@Dwight Williams
Some people would like nothing better than to shut down freedom of speech when it does not suit their agenda. During the past 10 years we saw numerous posters with multiple user names flood this site with anti conservative comments and that never seemed to be an issue with you? Liberal supporters will now "FLAG" a comment they don't like and we see it here all the time. They will also use conspiracy theories because they seem to think that EVERYONE should just love the current government. That's not the way it works and if you don't like criticism of the Liberal government I suggest you not read the comment section at all.« less
Some people would like nothing better than to shut down freedom of speech when it does not suit their agenda. During the past 10 years we saw numerous posters with multiple user names flood this site with anti conservative comments and that never seemed to be an issue with you? Liberal supporters will now "FLAG" a comment they don't like and we see it here all the time. They will also use conspiracy theories because they seem to think that EVERYONE should just love the current government. That's not the way it works and if you don't like criticism of the Liberal government I suggest you not read the comment section at all.« less
@Dwight Williams Continued...
In the light of the said above (if it passes the brilliant moderation, that is), I totally support your suggestion of dropping the commenting altogether - exactly because of the reason you stated: it creates more problems, than benefits.
However, I think, another viable alternative worth considering is dropping moderation and leaving the commenting open for abuse AND the abusers open to legal responsibilities.
To be continued...
In the light of the said above (if it passes the brilliant moderation, that is), I totally support your suggestion of dropping the commenting altogether - exactly because of the reason you stated: it creates more problems, than benefits.
However, I think, another viable alternative worth considering is dropping moderation and leaving the commenting open for abuse AND the abusers open to legal responsibilities.
To be continued...
@Dwight Williams
Thank you , Dwight Williams . Im not sure how you got this posted , but glad you did . I get some posts disallowed for stating my views based on verified facts without vitriol , when some of these 12 or so posters spew hate speech and downright lies .
I too have watched the vote counts being manipulated in real time .
I do remember an article about the previous Gov hiring 3500 posters to manipulate these boards at a cost of 250 million . Are some still employed by the party .
Notice the wording , not to offend the mod .
One poster mentioned a tech solution . 1 poster 1 IP address . Simple however they can still use VPN's .« less
Thank you , Dwight Williams . Im not sure how you got this posted , but glad you did . I get some posts disallowed for stating my views based on verified facts without vitriol , when some of these 12 or so posters spew hate speech and downright lies .
I too have watched the vote counts being manipulated in real time .
I do remember an article about the previous Gov hiring 3500 posters to manipulate these boards at a cost of 250 million . Are some still employed by the party .
Notice the wording , not to offend the mod .
One poster mentioned a tech solution . 1 poster 1 IP address . Simple however they can still use VPN's .« less
@Dwight Williams WOW after a dry spell CBC allowed me to post something again. I had all but given up
Notice I tweeted that fact ASAP?
https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/status/778967851633897473
Notice I tweeted that fact ASAP?
https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/status/778967851633897473
@Dwight Williams Continued 1
I totally recognize the kind of indignation the suggestion of unfiltered user content will arouse in some people. I myself is not a fan of profanity-laden speech.
However, these forums probably play a very important societal role in that they provide some release to a ... let's say hyperactive... segment of the society. I don't know if anyone researched the issue, and I am aware that CNN forums don't seem to have prevented much violence south of the border. Still, that's something worth considering.« less
I totally recognize the kind of indignation the suggestion of unfiltered user content will arouse in some people. I myself is not a fan of profanity-laden speech.
However, these forums probably play a very important societal role in that they provide some release to a ... let's say hyperactive... segment of the society. I don't know if anyone researched the issue, and I am aware that CNN forums don't seem to have prevented much violence south of the border. Still, that's something worth considering.« less
@Dwight Williams 'RE a Shady,
secretive system' Lets stress test CBC newfound Integrity. If you were
an undecided voter in Fundy Royal last year who would you believe as you
surfed the web and tried to make up your mind who best spoke for you?.
CBC?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/fundy-royal-riding-profile-1.3274276
or Rogers TV?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cFOKT6TlSE
CBC?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/fundy-royal-riding-profile-1.3274276
or Rogers TV?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cFOKT6TlSE
@Dwight Williams
I'm with you all the way, except for being willing to surrender my right to be heard via my public broadcaster, the CBC.
And you have no right to encourage them to do away with rights either.
The CBC has an obligation to fix their system - not just throw the whole thing out.
I'm with you all the way, except for being willing to surrender my right to be heard via my public broadcaster, the CBC.
And you have no right to encourage them to do away with rights either.
The CBC has an obligation to fix their system - not just throw the whole thing out.
@Dwight Williams
One other option that could solve concerns of many is dropping the Likes and the Dislikes.
Of course this is a prominent social media function, but I think it belongs to the drawbacks, rather than benefits of the social media. I'd love to expand on the topic when time allows.
For now, let's take a look at the benefits of not having the counts in the CBC forums:
1. Removes one propaganda tool for promoting opinions;
2. Removes pressure on thoughtful participants who may be susceptible to the 'crowd' pressure;
3. Removes one point of contention between 'competing' 'camps' here;
4. Eases the confusion caused by people commenting primarily on the first post they see by default, whether relevant or not.« less
One other option that could solve concerns of many is dropping the Likes and the Dislikes.
Of course this is a prominent social media function, but I think it belongs to the drawbacks, rather than benefits of the social media. I'd love to expand on the topic when time allows.
For now, let's take a look at the benefits of not having the counts in the CBC forums:
1. Removes one propaganda tool for promoting opinions;
2. Removes pressure on thoughtful participants who may be susceptible to the 'crowd' pressure;
3. Removes one point of contention between 'competing' 'camps' here;
4. Eases the confusion caused by people commenting primarily on the first post they see by default, whether relevant or not.« less
@Dwight Williams I am willing to surrender your right to comment too.
Comment sections have never, ever fostered much in the way of thoughtful and respectful conversations, going all the way back to the 70's and 80's before public internet. Any forum with public participation that had a thoughtful, respectful conversation was the benefactor of blind luck, or had an incredibly narrow audience.
But if it bothers you so much, why do you come back?
Comment sections have never, ever fostered much in the way of thoughtful and respectful conversations, going all the way back to the 70's and 80's before public internet. Any forum with public participation that had a thoughtful, respectful conversation was the benefactor of blind luck, or had an incredibly narrow audience.
But if it bothers you so much, why do you come back?
@Dwight Williams - Did you
read the link the other day to HuffPost's blog about CBC? Most excellent
- and considering that there are at least 3000 "digital influencers"
hired by Hapless and the fact that CBC is entirely CONtrolled by
Harper's minions, that means a third of us who are registered at cbc.ca
are hired trolls. Amazing but true. Golly I can hardly wait until the
Government has time to fix this mess!
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/barry-kiefl/cbc-problems_b_12049472.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/barry-kiefl/cbc-problems_b_12049472.html
@Lou Reed
Actually, I would argue that we DO have the right to comment.
This is the CBC. It's OUR public broadcaster, paid for by OUR money.
If anybody has to provide an open public forum (which they most vociferously do not, being about the most heavily pre-censored forum out there), it is the CBC. But with that responsibility, certainly does come an obligation to do what they can to keep trolls and other abusers out (which they somehow seem to think that posting under some name will prevent, which it does not).
Comments should be subjected to censorship only of views that violate the law - that's it. We have a right to be heard in OUR public forum!« less
Actually, I would argue that we DO have the right to comment.
This is the CBC. It's OUR public broadcaster, paid for by OUR money.
If anybody has to provide an open public forum (which they most vociferously do not, being about the most heavily pre-censored forum out there), it is the CBC. But with that responsibility, certainly does come an obligation to do what they can to keep trolls and other abusers out (which they somehow seem to think that posting under some name will prevent, which it does not).
Comments should be subjected to censorship only of views that violate the law - that's it. We have a right to be heard in OUR public forum!« less
@Joan MacDonald "Some people would like nothing better than to shut down freedom of speech when it does not suit their agenda."
[sigh] Why is it that the self-touted protectors of the Canadian identity are the ones most clueless as to what legal rights and obligations are belong to them as a Canadians? I hate to break this to you Joan, but your right to freedom of speech does not entitle you to a provided platform for that speech. Nobody owes you a comment section, a TV show, a book deal, a newspaper column or any other platform to spout whatever speech you care to spew. Your legal "freedom of speech" entitles you to speak without being jailed or forced not to communicate your ideas, nothing more. Rather than blather on about "Liberals", how be you learn the "Canadian values" spelled out in our legal system - you know, the things you claim to love and protect... Geez, such entitlement...« less
[sigh] Why is it that the self-touted protectors of the Canadian identity are the ones most clueless as to what legal rights and obligations are belong to them as a Canadians? I hate to break this to you Joan, but your right to freedom of speech does not entitle you to a provided platform for that speech. Nobody owes you a comment section, a TV show, a book deal, a newspaper column or any other platform to spout whatever speech you care to spew. Your legal "freedom of speech" entitles you to speak without being jailed or forced not to communicate your ideas, nothing more. Rather than blather on about "Liberals", how be you learn the "Canadian values" spelled out in our legal system - you know, the things you claim to love and protect... Geez, such entitlement...« less
@David Fletcher I'm sorry
David, but I've followed the CBC forums pretty much since inception, and
I've not seen any substantial decline in the quality of comments or
debate I the comment section... until the "real name" rule when we now
get the usual stuff mixed in with child-like whinging about the magical
old-days when the comment section was rainbows and unicorns.
All the "real name" rule did was spur creativity in name creation, because there are a lot of really good reasons why a person might not want their real name in here, and still have a valid, intelligent point. And having a real name attached to a post has never stopped anyone from being... objectionable.« less
All the "real name" rule did was spur creativity in name creation, because there are a lot of really good reasons why a person might not want their real name in here, and still have a valid, intelligent point. And having a real name attached to a post has never stopped anyone from being... objectionable.« less
@Joan MacDonald There is no freedom of speech issue in the CBC comments forum.
CBC is under no legal obligation to provide comment forums, nor to permit any particular type of post. "Freedom of speech" is a complete non sequitur with respect to these comment forums.
If you want a freedom of speech issue, go to Canada.ca and argue it there.
CBC is under no legal obligation to provide comment forums, nor to permit any particular type of post. "Freedom of speech" is a complete non sequitur with respect to these comment forums.
If you want a freedom of speech issue, go to Canada.ca and argue it there.
@Rusty Kern
"Translation: im a Liberal, i disagree with their opinion they have to be spammers or robo accounts..."
It is a tactic used to throw off suspicion of the very things one is engaging in. However, shutting down the comment section proves the whiners won. At that point we are left with the "media" engaging in mind control carte blanche. It sounds conspiratorial but really it is called "programming" for a reason.
"Translation: im a Liberal, i disagree with their opinion they have to be spammers or robo accounts..."
It is a tactic used to throw off suspicion of the very things one is engaging in. However, shutting down the comment section proves the whiners won. At that point we are left with the "media" engaging in mind control carte blanche. It sounds conspiratorial but really it is called "programming" for a reason.
@Dwight Williams
Good assessment.
Cyrus is the obvious notable gamer of the system, and that is not his real name.
Prior to the change a few months back, there was a guy who copied the names of others and posted hundreds of times a day. He is still active with multiple accounts, but is not copying the names of others.
Good assessment.
Cyrus is the obvious notable gamer of the system, and that is not his real name.
Prior to the change a few months back, there was a guy who copied the names of others and posted hundreds of times a day. He is still active with multiple accounts, but is not copying the names of others.
@Fenian Conn
"We're on to you"
I like most of his comments and who is "we"? Even his stance on having private healthcare was worth reading as he put up a very convincing argument. It just shows that most like his comments. Are you jealous, or are you trying to arouse suspicion in everything one does to suit this very, very dark story?
"We're on to you"
I like most of his comments and who is "we"? Even his stance on having private healthcare was worth reading as he put up a very convincing argument. It just shows that most like his comments. Are you jealous, or are you trying to arouse suspicion in everything one does to suit this very, very dark story?
@Ryan Coake ' pretty much
since inception,...I've not seen any substantial decline in the quality
of comments or debate I the comment section...'
___________________________________________
I cannot disagree more with you. The 'one liner to detailed' ratio has greatly increased over time.
But one can't blame CBC for that. Blame the social media.
Professional partizan propaganda ('astroturfing') was also absent around the year 2000 when I began visiting these forums.
___________________________________________
I cannot disagree more with you. The 'one liner to detailed' ratio has greatly increased over time.
But one can't blame CBC for that. Blame the social media.
Professional partizan propaganda ('astroturfing') was also absent around the year 2000 when I began visiting these forums.
This comment is awaiting moderation by the site administrators.
@Kat Burd And what sort of
Troll are you oh ye who has an ID I don't believe? However judging from
your comment I suspect that you and perhaps Captain Kirk would agree
with the letter I got this year from the Lawyer/Space Cadet Minister
Joly N'esy Pas???
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/07/reply-to-david-raymond-amos-from.html
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2016/07/reply-to-david-raymond-amos-from.html
@CBC et al - Sorry, for the
most part it is the same dozen paid con trolls that perpetuate discord
and attempt to portray their opinions and views as that of the majority.
From the looks of things, an e-mail gets sent to the con-trols that
certain articles will be open for comment and they gang up on those with
anti-conservative views, attacking character, insulting fellow
Canadians with differing opinions, responding with bullying comments or
being downright condescending to everyone that disagrees with them. Many
times there is no substance to their comments save for bullying and
insults. I also believe it is time to just simply stop allowing comments
on all stories, the posters under "con"trol of the far right CPC are
disgusting, deplorable and lack the true spirit of discussion or
debate.....they are of the mantra that the right is right and the rest
are secondary citizens..... If the CBC has any ethical intentions they
would suspend the accounts of those that consistently violate the preset
guidelines with no apparent consequence...they give real Canadians of
all political stripes a bad shake.« less
@Edward Grayburn Well i guess
they know about it now.Time will tell if they change things. Personally
i don't see what the big deal is, i don't think the police are
interested in tracking most people or listening to their conversations
or reading their texts or e-mails. The only ones who should be concerned
are the less desirable elements of society.
@Michael Smith
No, Trudeau definitely didn't say he'd repeal it. That's what almost sent me over to vote for the NDP this election. (His promise of changing the electoral system by the next election was what brought me back)
He said he'd be changing the most troublesome parts of it. That hasn't been done yet either, and I'm not terribly happy about that myself.
No, Trudeau definitely didn't say he'd repeal it. That's what almost sent me over to vote for the NDP this election. (His promise of changing the electoral system by the next election was what brought me back)
He said he'd be changing the most troublesome parts of it. That hasn't been done yet either, and I'm not terribly happy about that myself.
@Alex Johnston I suspect that
you are not the Governor General's daughterwho is also the lawyer CBC
hired to fix things in the comment section. However just in case you are
I must ask an obvious questions.
1. When will CBC ever learn that I save everything the instant I post it then create a pdf file later as I blog and Tweet about it as well as send you an email to register my indignation?.
2. Don't you think people notice when you delete the most popular comment stings that I happen to post within?
3. Never mind Mean Old Me for a minute. What about all the other people who were not malicious Trolls who also commented? Are we not the taxpayers who pay your wages?« less
1. When will CBC ever learn that I save everything the instant I post it then create a pdf file later as I blog and Tweet about it as well as send you an email to register my indignation?.
2. Don't you think people notice when you delete the most popular comment stings that I happen to post within?
3. Never mind Mean Old Me for a minute. What about all the other people who were not malicious Trolls who also commented? Are we not the taxpayers who pay your wages?« less
I'm not surprised that all
forms of communication can and are being monitored. I was out shopping
yesterday and for some reason I took notice of the insane amounts of
surveillance cameras . I hadn't really paid attention to them before,
but yesterday I noticed the damned things are everywhere. Guess I'll
have to be more discreet about scratching that itch the next time!
No comments:
Post a Comment