Local man drops his pasta in Terry, gets 1984d by Vekter

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

[Jacquerel]

I think we should have higher standards for what you post in space station 13 than "they let me post it on digg"

[scamoppi]

probably this one

[BlueMemesauce]

Vekter, I believe you're confusing the laws of the United States with the terms of service of web hosting servers. The United States has the first amendment which allows information to be freely distributed. For example, the Anarchist Cookbook is allowed in the United States and not illegal despite containing instructions for illegal things. It's not a legal issue, but a terms of service issue.

[Kendrickorium]

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

[TheLoLSwat]

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

please rate my title too

[Atlanta-Ned]

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

please rate my title too

It’s bad.

[Kendrickorium]

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

please rate my title too

"Poor soul threatened with blacklist for the crime of wanting better explosives education on Terry, A penut"
5/10

[TheLoLSwat]

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

please rate my title too

It’s bad.

well good thing i didnt ask you atlanta-ned, now lets see what kendrick has to say

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

please rate my title too

"Poor soul threatened with blacklist for the crime of wanting better explosives education on Terry, A penut"
5/10

what the flarp??

[Kendrickorium]

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

please rate my title too

It’s bad.

well good thing i didnt ask you atlanta-ned, now lets see what kendrick has to say

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

please rate my title too

"Poor soul threatened with blacklist for the crime of wanting better explosives education on Terry, A penut"
5/10

what the flarp??

less is more

[kieth4]

Mfs do be like this

[ekaterina]

I didn't get what the big deal was just as I'm sure the user in question didn't either, but Vekter explained it in quite a reasonable manner.
It would've been better if he'd done it in the ahelp instead of replying passive-aggressively there, but this still works.

Interesting. Just as this thread was made one minute before Vekter's first reply, so was my own post made one minute before Vekter's new reply.
Absolute ban bot. The user didn't know something that Vekter has now taught him and now understands why he shouldn't do what he did, but BOT Vekter still feels the need to ban him for 3 days just to fill his quota. Deplorable.

[Fren256]

How long until a real terrorist organization begins using ss13 to organize themselves

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

Admemes let him go, im glad this one worked out well!

[Kendrickorium]

How long until a real terrorist organization begins using ss13 to organize themselves

we already have a coding team

[Atlanta-Ned]

well good thing i didnt ask you atlanta-ned, now lets see what kendrick has to say

this is also a terrible title for a thread.

[BlueMemesauce]

Admemes let him go, im glad this one worked out well!

How is a 3 day ban letting him go? The admins keep calling it "illegal content" despite freedom of speech meaning it's not illegal. I don't know what web hosting service tgstation uses though so it might be against a terms of service.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

Admemes let him go, im glad this one worked out well!

How is a 3 day ban letting him go? The admins keep calling it "illegal content" despite freedom of speech meaning it's not illegal. I don't know what web hosting service tgstation uses though so it might be against a terms of service.

Considering this couldve easily been justified as a blacklist, a 3day is letting them go.

[warbluke]

A little ditty to accompany the thread:
https://youtu.be/uREig9-hGwA?t=20

[BlueMemesauce]

Admemes let him go, im glad this one worked out well!

How is a 3 day ban letting him go? The admins keep calling it "illegal content" despite freedom of speech meaning it's not illegal. I don't know what web hosting service tgstation uses though so it might be against a terms of service.

Considering this couldve easily been justified as a blacklist, a 3day is letting them go.

How? Nothing he did was illegal or against the rules.

[kinnebian]

Admemes let him go, im glad this one worked out well!

How is a 3 day ban letting him go? The admins keep calling it "illegal content" despite freedom of speech meaning it's not illegal. I don't know what web hosting service tgstation uses though so it might be against a terms of service.

Considering this couldve easily been justified as a blacklist, a 3day is letting them go.

How? Nothing he did was illegal or against the rules.

if you want to get technical copypastas are against the rules anyways, bomb making tutorial included or not

[Vekter]

I didn't get what the big deal was just as I'm sure the user in question didn't either, but Vekter explained it in quite a reasonable manner.
It would've been better if he'd done it in the ahelp instead of replying passive-aggressively there, but this still works.

Interesting. Just as this thread was made one minute before Vekter's first reply, so was my own post made one minute before Vekter's new reply.
Absolute ban bot. The user didn't know something that Vekter has now taught him and now understands why he shouldn't do what he did, but BOT Vekter still feels the need to ban him for 3 days just to fill his quota. Deplorable.

1) You're right, I could've acted better in the adminhelp. It's easy for us to assume that someone who's doing something monumentally stupid is doing it in bad faith.

2) This is the alternative to being blacklisted. I have to make sure that others don't think they can repeat his mistakes and get off with a slap on the wrist if they apologize nicely enough. There's gotta be a consequence for it.

[iwishforducks]

professionally handled. i would have let them off the hook with just the note but i understand why vekter stuck the 3 day. god bless you vekter. and god bless the appealer for being decent- barring the whole “fake bomb recipe” nonsense, of course.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

Admemes let him go, im glad this one worked out well!

How is a 3 day ban letting him go? The admins keep calling it "illegal content" despite freedom of speech meaning it's not illegal. I don't know what web hosting service tgstation uses though so it might be against a terms of service.

Considering this couldve easily been justified as a blacklist, a 3day is letting them go.

How? Nothing he did was illegal or against the rules.

I know this post is bait, but no, memesauce, you cannot run around spreading bomb-making and chemical gas recipes for real life on the servers.

[MooCow12]

wernt they fake posts about how to make those things though

I guess at the very least they could quickly swap the copypasta to ss13 variant of warcrimes like how to make an assembly bomb (why are they called that when the plasteel bombs are also called assemblies) or a hellfoam grenade.

[Kendrickorium]

Admemes let him go, im glad this one worked out well!

How is a 3 day ban letting him go? The admins keep calling it "illegal content" despite freedom of speech meaning it's not illegal. I don't know what web hosting service tgstation uses though so it might be against a terms of service.

Considering this couldve easily been justified as a blacklist, a 3day is letting them go.

How? Nothing he did was illegal or against the rules.

feel free to start exercising your right to free speech here by listing bomb recipes, go on, we'll all wait

[GPeckman]

How? Nothing he did was illegal or against the rules.

Its not illegal, but sharing instructions on making explosives is definitely against the TOS of many companies. Suppose, if you will, the whatever commpany rents server space to TG is one of those companies. Are you starting to see the issue?

[BlueMemesauce]

Then say that instead of saying its "illegal" when its not.

[TypicalRig]

You know I genuinely find the justification behind this sus because how would a webhost, who is randomly prying into the files, be able to differentiate between a real suggestion for an instruction guide on irl weapons vs the tons and tons of say logs of ingame shit that covers far worse of the same topics unless they played SS13. We already have bombs in-game and people instructing on how to make them. We have teargas. We have guns. We have flamethrowers. We have nukes. We have every sketchy weapon under the sun in the game, and probably far worse in the logs. If this has happened before, in what fucking context would you not be able to tell them "yeah that's for the game sillybilly!"

Surely if this was going to cause problems, it would've done so far sooner, and over blatant ingame mechanics, no?

if it's against the TOS, okay sure, but just say that instead of pretending like it's a legitimate threat lol

[HeyHey]

Seems like hand wringing about a non issue (in burgerland)

[Vekter]

How? Nothing he did was illegal or against the rules.

Its not illegal, but sharing instructions on making explosives is definitely against the TOS of many companies. Suppose, if you will, the whatever commpany rents server space to TG is one of those companies. Are you starting to see the issue?

In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed Title 18 of the United State Code, subsection 842(p), outlawing the distribution, teaching, or demonstration of information on how to make a bomb, so long as the offender intends the information to be used to commit a federal violent crime, or knows the person receiving the instruction intends to use it to commit a federal violent crime. If convicted, offenders face a fine of up to $250,000 and 20 years in prison. The fine increases to $500,000 if the offender is an organization.

[Archie700]

You know I genuinely find the justification behind this sus because how would a webhost, who is randomly prying into the files, be able to differentiate between a real suggestion for an instruction guide on irl weapons vs the tons and tons of say logs of ingame shit that covers far worse of the same topics unless they played SS13. We already have bombs in-game and people instructing on how to make them. We have teargas. We have guns. We have flamethrowers. We have nukes. We have every sketchy weapon under the sun in the game, and probably far worse in the logs. If this has happened before, in what fucking context would you not be able to tell them "yeah that's for the game sillybilly!"

Surely if this was going to cause problems, it would've done so far sooner, and over blatant ingame mechanics, no?

if it's against the TOS, okay sure, but just say that instead of pretending like it's a legitimate threat lol

Those recipes we make in ss13 are much more simplified and fantastical compared to the real stuff.
We can't really generate "plasma" in large quantities in real life, for one. Or mine it.

[GPeckman]

How? Nothing he did was illegal or against the rules.

Its not illegal, but sharing instructions on making explosives is definitely against the TOS of many companies. Suppose, if you will, the whatever commpany rents server space to TG is one of those companies. Are you starting to see the issue?

In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed Title 18 of the United State Code, subsection 842(p), outlawing the distribution, teaching, or demonstration of information on how to make a bomb, so long as the offender intends the information to be used to commit a federal violent crime, or knows the person receiving the instruction intends to use it to commit a federal violent crime. If convicted, offenders face a fine of up to $250,000 and 20 years in prison. The fine increases to $500,000 if the offender is an organization.

This law is only very rarely enforced, and your own source says as much:

It is extremely rare to find instances where people have been charged and convicted of posting bomb instructions, though it does happen.

As an example, the Anarchist Cookbook can be purchased from Amazon.

[Sightld2]

Mm yes indeed its ok to break rarely enforced laws.

[Lacran]

Vekter, I believe you're confusing the laws of the United States with the terms of service of web hosting servers. The United States has the first amendment which allows information to be freely distributed. For example, the Anarchist Cookbook is allowed in the United States and not illegal despite containing instructions for illegal things. It's not a legal issue, but a terms of service issue.

That's not how the first amendment works, there are plenty of things that are illegal to say.

https://www.phe.gov/s3/law/Pages/Laws.a ... p%E2%80%8B)-,18%20U.S.C.,to%20commit%20a%20Federal%20crime.

Covers teaching bomb making, if someone uses the info you gave them to commit a crime you can be liable if they can establish mens rea

[GPeckman]

Mm yes indeed its ok to break rarely enforced laws.

Alright, let's actually look at the law in question then:

Subsection 842(p) of title 18 of the United States Code outlaws teaching,
demonstrating, or distributing information on how to make or use explosives,
destructive devices, or weapons of mass destruction either when the offender intends
the instruction or information to be used to commit a federal crime of violence or
when the offender knows that person to whom the instruction or information has
been given intends to use it to a commit a federal crime of violence.

So its illegal only if the the person distributing the instructions wants them to be used for criminal purposes or knows that people who hear will use it for criminal purposes. Both seem to be self-evidently false in this case, so the law wasn't broken in this case.

[Sightld2]

this is a much stronger argument, thank you

[Lacran]

Mm yes indeed its ok to break rarely enforced laws.

Alright, let's actually look at the law in question then:

Subsection 842(p) of title 18 of the United States Code outlaws teaching,
demonstrating, or distributing information on how to make or use explosives,
destructive devices, or weapons of mass destruction either when the offender intends
the instruction or information to be used to commit a federal crime of violence or
when the offender knows that person to whom the instruction or information has
been given intends to use it to a commit a federal crime of violence.

So its illegal only if the the person distributing the instructions wants them to be used for criminal purposes or knows that people who hear will use it for criminal purposes. Both seem to be self-evidently false in this case, so the law wasn't broken in this case.

The issue being that no host wants to deal with any potential liability regarding some idiot learning bomb making on their service. The only difference in culpability here is mens rea which means you will be investigated.

[Boot]

Did you know that if you mix potassium and water together you get a bomb. Luckily Vekter has me on block so I won't get banned.

[Fren256]

Then say that instead of saying its "illegal" when its not.

Even if it's not illegal your name will definitely end up in a watchlist.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

Then say that instead of saying its "illegal" when its not.

Even if it's not illegal your name will definitely end up in a watchlist.

Tbf, thanks to snowden, we know everyone is being watched, no lists necessary

[Vekter]

Did you know that if you mix potassium and water together you get a bomb. Luckily Vekter has me on block so I won't get banned.

I'm not a forum admin, so even if I think the forums would be a markedly better place without you, I can't do anything about it.

[kayozz]

I'mma go with this being well handled, ignore the baiters trying to stir up a peanut's nest.
Certainly not worth risking it.

Imagine the headlines.

Man posing as virtual clown downloads gnarly text file by accident, gets slipped by the feds. Sad Honk. 18 years in the slammer.

[conrad]

Peanut for: viewtopic.php?p=699839#p699839

On god, what was this guy thinking? Is there any world where this ban gets reduced?

2/10
going forward, 1984 references in peanut titles will be an automatic deduction of 5 points.

Could've said "merc'd", could've gone "Local man drops his pasta in Terry, so Vekter swept her" to rhyme.

I'm not often on team "scoring peanut threads" but Kendrick is undeniably right here.

[BlueMemesauce]

You know I genuinely find the justification behind this sus because how would a webhost, who is randomly prying into the files, be able to differentiate between a real suggestion for an instruction guide on irl weapons vs the tons and tons of say logs of ingame shit that covers far worse of the same topics unless they played SS13. We already have bombs in-game and people instructing on how to make them. We have teargas. We have guns. We have flamethrowers. We have nukes. We have every sketchy weapon under the sun in the game, and probably far worse in the logs. If this has happened before, in what fucking context would you not be able to tell them "yeah that's for the game sillybilly!"

Surely if this was going to cause problems, it would've done so far sooner, and over blatant ingame mechanics, no?

if it's against the TOS, okay sure, but just say that instead of pretending like it's a legitimate threat lol

reminds me of that one meme where its like a bunch of fbi guys around a computer watching someone type into google something like "how to build a nuke" but then he finally adds "rimworld" or some game before doing the search and all the fbi are disappointed

[BONERMASTER]

"Man drops bombshell in terrry chat, gets admins FED up and put on watchlist" - arguably a more thrilling title by my standards.

I also want to make an amusing remark towards Vekter for his attempt at legalese. You quote a random factoid, so not even a concrete law, as your legal understanding of the situation. Not only that, but it's dated 1996, brother. America since then experienced the Twin Towers, War on Terror, War on Drugs and whatever other war you can pull out of your ass, how can you know if there haven't been 100 revisions done to this section since then? Also, your factoid seemingly contains a massive loophole that other users have pointed out, that you haven't adressed in any way.

PREFACE:
LEGAL DISCLAIMER:
BONERMASTER & ASSOCIATES IS A WORK OF FICTION AND NOT A LAW FIRM, BONERMASTER IS NOT A LICENSED LAWYER AND IS NOT IMPLYING OR ATTEMPTING TO ACT IN ANY CAPACITY AS SUCH. BONERMASTER WILL NOT GIVE YOU LEGAL ADVICE, PLEASE CONSULT A LICENSED LAWYER FOR YOUR LEGAL QUERIES!
ANY AND ALL REFERENCES TO THE LAW ARE MADE FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY! DO NOT ACT UPON ANY AND ALL IMPLIED SUGGESTIONS MADE BY BONERMASTER OR ANY OTHER FORM OF RELATED ALIAS, CONSULT A LICENSED LAWYER FOR LEGAL ADVICE.
ANY IMPLIED AND SUGGESTED COUNSELLING, IF ANY, WILL ONLY AND STRICTLY BE IN REGARDS TO APPEALS MADE ON THIS FORUM, AND REMAIN WHOLLY CONTAINED IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS GAME AND APPEALS FILED ON THIS FORUM FOR THIS GAME.
AT NO POINT WILL BONERMASTER & ASSOCIATES RAISE FEES, CHARGES OR OTHERWISE GENERATE ANY INCOME WHILE IN THEIR CAPACITY AS A RULE ADVISOR.



So allow me to demonstrate proper etiquette when finessing someone with legalese:

1. Link your source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/842

2. Post the relevant section (OPTIONAL: Highlight the important bits), in this case, I'll quote the section P of the law that your factoid speaks of:

"(p) Distribution of Information Relating to Explosives, Destructive Devices, and Weapons of Mass Destruction.—

(1) Definitions.—In this subsection—
(A) the term “destructive device” has the same meaning as in section 921(a)(4);
(B) the term “explosive” has the same meaning as in section 844(j); and
(C) the term “weapon of mass destruction” has the same meaning as in section 2332a(c)(2).

(2) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person—
(A) to teach or demonstrate the making or use of an explosive, a destructive device, or a weapon of mass destruction, or to distribute by any means information pertaining to, in whole or in part, the manufacture or use of an explosive, destructive device, or weapon of mass destruction, with the intent that the teaching, demonstration, or information be used for, or in furtherance of, an activity that constitutes a Federal crime of violence; or
(B) to teach or demonstrate to any person the making or use of an explosive, a destructive device, or a weapon of mass destruction, or to distribute to any person, by any means, information pertaining to, in whole or in part, the manufacture or use of an explosive, destructive device, or weapon of mass destruction, knowing that such person intends to use the teaching, demonstration, or information for, or in furtherance of, an activity that constitutes a Federal crime of violence."


As is my understanding as a civilian that is not acting in any capacity as a lawyer, it is my theory that the law seems mostly concerned with the teachings being used to commit massive violence. But I would also theorize, that even if you're somehow acting in good faith and posting instructions into a video game chat, that you may very well be held liable regardless, because I can imagine that you will be facing a line of questions like "Could you have forseen, that someone in a publicly available chat channel would use your information in a prohibited way?" and the answer would eventually be yes, and that's where I could see you ending up being in gross violation of the law as explained above. This is of course just a theory with no suggestion or impulse to act upon, consult a licensed lawyer for legal advice.

That'd be all, thanks for coming to my talk, consult a real, licensed lawyer for legal advice, I am not a lawyer.


With cooking regards
-BONERMASTER

[dirk_mcblade]

Yeah I'd say permaban this guy or blacklist even. You don't want glowies sniffing around your minecraft server because some guy wanted to larp as an isis propaganda video.

[Kendrickorium]

BONERMASTER is BACK BABY

[dendydoom]

without even getting into the legal side of it, it's just common sense to not want this kind of shit in your nerdy multiplayer roleplaying game. the entire international intelligence community is very well aware that extremists use video games to organize and share information. if you think it's the height of comedy to ironically share detailed instructions on how to assemble explosives then do it on your own dime.