Beware ATS Your Anonymity may be at Risk

The Daily Kos is a website very similar to Above Top Secret. It's a member driven discussion forum, where anonymous members write "diaries", and then a discussion ensues. Unlike ATS, The Kos also has staff writers, and members are invited to comment on those "articles".

Yes, The Daily Kos is a left leaning website that caters to Democrats and left wing ideals. But, that shouldn't matter here. What's at stake here is your anonymity and your free speech.

Recently, an DK member, DowneastDem, posted a diary calling out Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an anti-masker and anti-vaxxer conspiracy theorist, for cavorting with Neo-Nazis. You can read it HERE. That diary really, really upset Robert F Kennedy Jr.! Since The Daily Kos, like ATS, is protected under the infamous Section 230, he's suing DK to "unmask" the anomality of their member DowneastDem, so he can sue them.

Kennedy sicced his lawyers on us, demanding identifying information on DowneastDem. Because of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, he cannot sue Daily Kos—the site itself—for defamation. We are protected by the so-called safe harbor. That’s why he’s demanding we reveal what we know about DowneastDem so they can sue her or him directly.

www.dailykos.com...

The Daily Kos LOST that case.

Despite the utter lack of legal merit, the judge in this case essentially decided that the defamation arguments needed to be hashed out between the author—DowneastDem—and Kennedy, and ordered us to reveal whatever identifying information we have, ignoring both our community member’s free speech rights and our interest as an organization to safeguard those rights by preserving pseudonymity. We are in the process of appealing.

Court filings HERE and HERE

Of course, The Daily Kos is appealing the ruling, and I hope they win. But, if they don't, BEWARE ATS, we could be next!

Easy solution, claim the servers are in Canada with a speedy transfer. Then proudly state "Have fun with that", they have the best laws in the world when it comes to online privacy and client revealing information.

Simply put there is a reason why you never hear about 'online privacy' being invaded in that country. Because NO JUDGE in Canada will even consider changing or challenging the privacy laws in place. Protects to many Blue-Coat corrupted politicians.

However, there may be an upside if things do go that way. That is the fact that once online privacy is invaded and people are revealed, with this entire privacy thing deemed here in the US there is no such thing.

This will open a free-for-all info war on every politician in America. So let them bring it. They will quickly back-trace their steps when they realize who some of us are. Which will add HUGE credibility to our claims on certain Agendas with full blown evidence.

So, I dare them to open Pandora's Box. Because you guys can and will be surprised WHO is actually on these forums bringing solid evidence among agendas.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well you do have a right to sue for defamation if the information someone is saying about you is untrue and impuning your character

I've posted links to my bands pages on Facebook with my name on them, and pictures of myself on here. I'm not trying to be anonymous lol.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

*laughs*

Sow what you reap, leftist!

Opinions are now illegal if they aren't approved beforehand.

*laughs again*

We've never agreed on the issue of free speech, glad to see you finally coming around.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Sounds like ACCOUNTABILITY.

"ignoring both our community member’s free speech rights and our interest as an organization to safeguard those rights by preserving pseudonymity"

1st amendment rights were not violated and pseudonymity is not protected by the Constitution.

Sucks to suck.

originally posted by: HONROC
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well you do have a right to sue for defamation if the information someone is saying about you is untrue and impuning your character

If you're famous, it's a bit harder to do. However, if you do your research, through the links I've provided, you'll see that The Daily Kos and DowneastDem more than proved their case.

Don't forget, Devin Nunes tried to get Twitter to do the same, so he could sue to parody account holders, "Devin Nunes Cow", and "Devin Nunes Mom". He got shot down, because he's famous, and it was parody.

Imagine ATS members getting individually sued for calling Joe Biden or Tom Hanks a pedophile!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Don't know about Hanks, but the evidence seems to be against Biden on that one.. Bad example

I would suggest using a VPN for privacy, but of course, then the Thought Police could just lean on the VPN provider to disclose user's identity. Many VPN companies that claim to protect their user's personal information are lying.

I like to make my own VPNs.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You're seeing it all wrong. Perhaps willingly if you are a Democrat. RfK Jr biting commies in the ass is bad?
Scared to speak the truth? It's about time big Tech's snowflake troll legion got some pushback, and if you push back, they push over. David vs Goliath.

a reply to: DBCowboy

*laughs*

Sow what you reap, leftist!

I can always count on you to resort to partisan attacks and to always make everything about the evil left.


a reply to: HONROC

No, it can't be proven. Nor can claims of dementia be proven.
If this case goes to RFK JR, look out, because the right wing isn't safe either.
No one on ATS will be safe from legal retribution.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Just looked at your name, you're definitely a leftist.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

So you think opinions should not be punished?

Good.

You believe in free expression?

Wonderful.

Wasn't you that said, "Words have consequences?"

Asking for a friend laughing his ass off.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I stand by statement I made yesterday in another thread regarding Biden being a pedophile.

If it looks like duck, walks like duck, and sniffs little girls' heads while palming their heads like a melon then that duck is a pedophile.

I'm not saying he's committed any acts of pedophilia but he is a pedophile, based on the standards the Left called Trump one.

Funny how you mention Biden and Hanks. Or maybe not. Birds of a feather, right?

a reply to: PharoahSpiderMan

This isn't the Mud Pit. My screen name and my political leanings have nothing to do with the threat being launched against ALL anonymous users posting their opinions or sharing stories in social media threads on all kinds of forums, including ATS, GAB and Telegraph.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: DBCowboy

*laughs*

Sow what you reap, leftist!

I can always count on you to resort to partisan attacks and to always make everything about the evil left.


a reply to: HONROC

No, it can't be proven. Nor can claims of dementia be proven.
If this case goes to RFK JR, look out, because the right wing isn't safe either.
No one on ATS will be safe from legal retribution.

Anyone that believes Joe Biden is in full possession of his mental faculties is deluding themselves.

Watch the VP debate between him and Paul Ryan in 2012, and compare/contrast Joe then and now. He has morphed from an articulate, well-spoken person easily able to convey his thoughts, to a babbling, befuddled person with poor impulse control.

The suggestion of "stuttering or speech impediment" is a disgrace and insult to folks who honestly suffer from that condition. Where was Joe's stutter in 2012? Are there a lot of cases of spontaneous stuttering after age 75? Usually that is classified as a symptom of aging, as far as I'm aware.

I've never seen any evidence that he's a pedo, but his son, that is a different story. I stick to what my ears and eyes show me, which is that Joe is a man in serious cognitive decline, and if not suffering with dementia, will be shortly. Usually the "Joe is a pedo" crap is linked with the "Joe has dementia" observations, as a convenient means of discarding both suggestions, although the the later one seems like a very possible scenario in my estimation.

I'm not hiding, and I stand behind all I've written here. Writing about someone and not being willing to stand up and tell them to their face is a bit weak. (IMHO) But if you feel the need to trash others while hiding I suppose there is no better place than an anonymous forum. If you want to know, just ask.

a reply to: DBCowboy

So you think opinions should not be punished?

Please check out the links that I provided before you post your ignorant opinion. The "diary" in question wasn't an opinion piece. It was a shared report from a translated German newspaper about RFK Jr attending an anti-mask/anti-vax rally in Germany.

Opinions are not a risk here. Reporting events that point to questionable behavior, left for the reader to decide, are.

a reply to: HONROC

Thank you. Someone else sees it.

Amazing how it was insinuated Trump had a fetish for his daughter because he called her beautiful, but Biden can take showers with...you know what, I don't want to discuss it. Water is wet, sugar is sweet, and Biden is what he is.

a reply to: network dude

Daily Ko's banned me years ago for bringing up stupid things like the Constitution and "individual rights".

I didn't even know they were still a website to be honest.