Simon I totally understand making people register from a non static IP. What I have issue with is when I can not even view a PUBLIC forum. I have very little issues with this forum, I was just talking about other forums I read from time to time. Even for posters that want to stay secret, you can always put up a warning that they are on VPN or are suspect. I don't really see the harm as long as there not making trouble. Never moderated a forum before, so I understand if they say absolutely no Anon posting, thats ok. But they should still be able to read public parts.
Warning: Watchtower computer dept. registers accounts on Ex-JW sites, coerces people to divulge their personal details
by WTS Archive 49 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Nitty-Gritty
Simon: If they were going to do it, I also doubt they would be so stupid as to use their own network as the source. It would be incredibly clumsy. It is far more likely to just be some over eager zealot thinking they are doing the right thing and in doing so, doing exactly the wrong thing.
Precisely!
-
Simon
But they should still be able to read public parts
Very often the same networks that allow anonymous access to mask identities are also used to launch attacks. At some point it simply becomes easier to block the networks that allow 'bad traffic'.
You are looking at being blocked from what you want to do, not from the perspective of a site owner who may be getting a lot of headaches by allowing that traffic source.
Very few website owners would ever want to *not* get traffic - blocking it must therefore mean that traffic isn't worth all the other trouble that might come with it.
I'm planning on blocking Amazon Web Services EC2 range simply because it seems to be an endless source of badly behaved, clumsy and robot.txt-ignoring bots and scrapers. It costs money to serve content to those machines and there are often not eyeballs on the other side of them.
-
jws
Recently people have asked me to send them a copy of the document I wrote up for JWs. This forum's messaging doesn't allow for attachments that I know of, so I suggested email.
I have an anonymous gmail account I use for such things. Yes, yes, I'm sure the right people can find out who's behind it, but I don't think the JWs have that much power. And I suggested the people I'm sending to also set up a dummy account as well. They don't know who I am, so they should protect their privacy as well.
Hell, we have enough trouble with idiots who think they're going to bring down the Watchtower themselves that leak the emails of their base in a vain effort to try to make themselves look powerful. Who might have actually had more support had they not been so foolish with trusted information. -
no-zombie
It's just another example of Theocratic Warfare; where it's quite ok to deceive and lie to people for the sake of Kingdom advancement. And its very sad that even here, we need to be careful. But for the sake of our freeness of speech, it would be wisest course to always keep our personal details out the posts we make.
-
Sliced
To be fair, let's think about how much the Governing Body encourages members to spy on one another. There's been many a magazine article with photos showing us just how its done! It is totally plausible that they COULD very well know about this- but turn a blind eye and feign ignorance or (as they typically do) use out right denial.
They seem extremely uptight towards the so called Apostate community as of late... hmmmm I wonder why?
Although I do believe in the "lone wolf" theory- I would never put it past this organization to use whatever it's got or takes to try to eliminate threats to themselves. They are the BEASTS they portray in their literature.
-
Sliced
It's just another example of Theocratic Warfare; where it's quite ok to deceive and lie to people for the sake of Kingdom advancement. And its very sad that even here, we need to be careful. But for the sake of our freeness of speech, it would be wisest course to always keep our personal details out the posts we make
Agree with you NoZombie! Unfortunately- you can't really trust anyone unless you know them (in person)
-
StephaneLaliberte
I'm a guru in IT and at one point in my life, I thought about hacking angry, rambling apostates who threw unfounded accusations. However, for every apostate of the sort, there'd be 20 other apostates who'd correct the lies, stand for the facts, and write something similar to: "There is enough condemning evidence against the society, we don't need to make up new ones".
Understanding that apostates were largely made up of people seeking facts, my desire to hack them faded away. In the end, years later, I became inactive myself.
For the Bethel to have a hacking policy against us would utterly senseless. I believe in the lone wolf theory.
-
JWdaughter
There is nothing that the borg can do to me anymore. Tattle on me to my mom? She is under no illusions and refuses to deal with me (again, until she starts talking to me again). I wish I could turn the tables on them some way. They just piss me off on the principle of the thing. They have spoiled my relationship with my mom forever because my mom is insane about them and has some creeping dementia to boot. It's like she's dead already, and then she resurrects herself and she is old and I can't do to her what she is willing to do to me. Arrrgghh. I'm so over the borg.
That JWs feel so compelled to spy on others (with or without the explicit egging on by the the Borg) just says something about the entire organization that is so sick, sick, sick. They tattle, they spy, they take notes so they can harm others, destroy families and shake up communities. So what if someone wants to fade or is there, active and not buying it? The borg should not be doing anything corporately or organizationally that can harm them, if leaked. And there is nothing that a JW can do to the organization to hurt it when they are showing up, counting hours and giving talks. If all half hearted JWs just disappeared, not many JWs would be left at all.
-
WTS Archive
Re: blocking VPNs and Proxies. It would still be a hassle, because there are many, many services that can be used as proxies. You can't block 'em all.
And someone asked why we banned them in the first place - because they were messaging other people and while we can warn everyone we could never be sure that everyone got that warning or took it seriously.