[AusNOG] What are we , collectively, doing about the impending mandatatory censorship scheme?

[Skeeve Stevens]

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/gillard-to-stick-with-web-filter-despite-disquiet-20100707-100qe.html

You rock MMC.

...Skeeve

--
Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director
eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists
skeeve at eintellego.net / www.eintellego.net
Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954
Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve
www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve ; facebook.com/eintellego
--
NOC, NOC, who's there?

From: Phillip Grasso [mailto:phillip.grasso at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 8 July 2010 12:26 AM
To: Matthew Moyle-Croft
Cc: Skeeve Stevens; ausnog at ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] What are we , collectively, doing about the impending mandatatory censorship scheme?

you raise good points, let me say this;

Senate Seats. Hit them where it hurts.

my back of envelope count is that we'll need 338K votes to get 1 senate seat.

1 Senate seat will probably be enough to do damage to a filtering program, especially when they would want to do deals to get other things across (assuming they don't have an overwhelming majority)
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Matthew Moyle-Croft <mmc at internode.com.au<mailto:mmc at internode.com.au>> wrote:

On 07/07/2010, at 11:22 PM, Phillip Grasso wrote:

> its been pretty clear what Google position all along. Why else do you think Conroy has it in for Google.
>
> The problem is that not enough 'outcry' from the industry is there, so Conroy is free to say he's got the support of the industry, with a possibly few big players in his back pocket due to NBN, he can say things such as 'industry consultation/support' etc.
I think we could be super organised, with a huge media budget and the Fed Govt wouldn't change their mind before the election.

If they did change their mind then the opposition would just use it to show (a) they're backing down and not delivering on YET another policy (b) not tough on Child Pornography (c) not protecting our kids.  Which ever of the arguments works the best for TonyA at the time.

This isn't a rational argument.  It's clear the Conroy isn't interested in rational arguments.   The whole proposal is laughable (heck, I've just come back from the US where we ARE a joke because of this - most people think it's already running!), but still, the telecommunications industry is a poor block of votes compared to keeping the conservative Christian lobby on side (the people who want this).

The focus really needs to be on these things:

If Labor is reelected will they claim they have a mandate to implement the filter (even if no one voted Labor because of it).   Or will it die as a "non-core promise" if Conroy is moved on as telecommunications minister?

If the Liberals are elected instead, what will they do?   Will they show sanity and kill it (small-l liberal) or be beholden to the same conservative Christian lobby who have convinced Labor it's a good idea.

Labor, as above, can't be and won't be able to chance their minds before the election.  The question is - will this be an election issue or will we be back to beating up on the vunerable and non-voting refugees again like the tough people we are.   (Must remind Christians like TonyA about what Christianity is about - seem to remember a few bits from the Bible from Sunday school and Jesus embracing everyone and looking after the poor and destitute, not just some of them - anyway, offtopic).

MMC




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100708/7b881552/attachment.html>