Campaign against anonymity online?

[_Trevor]

I posted this on another thread as a lighthearted jab, but I think it is worthy of a more serious look.

Critics of Mormonism have dealt with the More Good Foundation and the likes of Allen Wyatt, but other "religions" are also looking to combat online criticism, masking their real concerns under the rubric of "hate crimes." Given Scientology's track record on dealing with criticism, we can imagine what their main concern is--they don't want former members to have the freedom of criticizing them anonymously. Naturally, they are also spooked by the efforts of ANONYMOUS, a group that ought to scare anyone. But, if the Scientologists had their way, even the more innocuous forms of dissent would be squelched.

Check this out: http://www.scientologytoday.org/press/806041114122_scn-int.html

Here are some interesting quotes:

Over 100 law enforcement and government officials, clergy and educators attended an interfaith conference in May at the Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre International in Hollywood to address the growing problem of Internet hate crime and to see how they can work together to improve Internet safety and security.

Internet technologists explained how the Internet is structured and used as the base for attack and as shelter to maintain anonymity, while millions of users are vulnerable at any given moment when logged on.

While he noted with considerable accuracy that religious institutions are under attack online, he also articulated the need for solidarity amongst all faiths to pull through and that conferences such as these are one of the mechanisms to do so. He punched home the principle that "a crime against one religion is a crime against all religions" so all religions should stand together against hate and intolerance.

Coming from any other group, I would still find the implications of this troubling for free speech, especially given what passes for hate crime among some of the online apologists. To criticize a religion is to engage in hate speech in their minds. When Scientology gets involved, however, one can bet that the real intent is to squelch all kinds of criticism in exactly the way that some Mormon apologists would also love to see (but secretly fear would end their favorite pastime).

Here is an omen of things to come, and it is not pretty for victims of cult groups. (by the way, I am not including the LDS Church among cult groups, but the protections some Mormons would like from criticism could be used by actual cults.)

[_Infymus]

Allen Wyatt (a.k.a. SNAKE) may have registered over 3000 websites, but it is doing him little good other than costing him $20k a year.

People aren't searching for "Mormon Temples" and the like. People are searching for "Mormon Garments".

I had nearly 700k visitors last month. 13.9% of them came in searching for "garments".

Flooding the Internet with fake sites originated with pornographers. It suits people like Wyatt just fine. They hope to saturate the net with so many sites, a large percentage of those looking for "Mormonism" will stumble on their site - that way Allen and his ilk can show them a monogamous Joseph Smith, a single version of the first vision, and a Cult that isn't racist, homophobic or "weird".

The problem that Allen doesn't seem to realize is that search engines categorize more than just by who links to whom.

I wonder how secure NS1.INTELLECTUALRESERVEINC.ORG is. /evil grin

As for both Scientology and Mormonism, they are one and the same. Both want to carefully spoon feed the public a watered down, sugary version of their Cult. Scientology doesn't want you to know about Xenu. Mormonism doesn't want you to know that their God too is an alien who lives on another planet called Kolob.

Both are kooky man made religions. Joseph Smith's was all about screwing young women and taking money. Hubbard's was about complete control and money.

When and IF ever Cults like Mormonism or S$ are able to ban it, we will simply move our material onto servers in countries where these Cults cannot get them, and will continue to expose them for what they are.

[_Bond...James Bond]

Allen Wyatt (a.k.a. SNAKE) may have registered over 3000 websites, but it is doing him little good other than costing him $20k a year.

People aren't searching for "Mormon Temples" and the like. People are searching for "Mormon Garments".

I had nearly 700k visitors last month. 13.9% of them came in searching for "garments".

Flooding the Internet with fake sites originated with pornographers. It suits people like Wyatt just fine. They hope to saturate the net with so many sites, a large percentage of those looking for "Mormonism" will stumble on their site - that way Allen and his ilk can show them a monogamous Joseph Smith, a single version of the first vision, and a Cult that isn't racist, homophobic or "weird".

That's the problem. When people want to find the dirt on Mormonism they'll look for hours. They'll read a feel good website for about....3 seconds before they hit return and go back to that Google search page. So basically....the LDS are screwed when it comes to the dirt and the Net.

[_Trevor]

My actual concern is that religious groups get enough traction on this idea that criticism is hate speech to get legislation passed to that effect.

[_moksha]

I wonder how secure NS1.INTELLECTUALRESERVEINC.ORG is. /evil grin

You just cost either Allen or some tithe payer an extra $20 a year for that suggestion.

[_Infymus]

I wonder how secure NS1.INTELLECTUALRESERVEINC.ORG is. /evil grin

You just cost either Allen or some tithe payer an extra $20 a year for that suggestion.

Actually not, dear, as that is a DNS entry pointer already owned by the Cult. Many of their sites point to that said entry.

My wondering at how secure it was, was thinking about bot netting or hacking, of which of course, I know nothing about.

/eye roll.