Second Life will be banned in Australia

I dare say that there might even be more churches per head in the US than there are pubs per head in Oz!

ahaha
i bet oz have the americans beat in the pokie per capita ratio though.

what is he planning to do with that?

He's very slowly rebuilding it's insides... as he can afford. It's not an investment, it's a personal thing for him.

Yes, let us know...

This is starting to make the rounds in some group chats.... Unverified seems premature to send into group chats..


That page doesnt even look like anything other than someone rants or rumors...

Okay can we keep this on topic please?

Im sure many of us are seeking answers and want to find these instead of whatever else people want to type.

Anyone have some real news on this issue? concrete, not just the BS we find on dodgy web sites.

Aylin

The info here is pretty much right.

BDS

I checked with a couple of Aussie friends last night. They basically said this is just so much politics and very unlikely to happen. That the Australian goverments efforts into some sort of national firewall have not met with much success or support.

Senator Conroy is a nominee for the UK Internet Service providers awards, he's in the "Internet villain" category:

http://www.ispaawards.org.uk//page/category_internet_villain

We need more honest to goodness Whigs in the forums. None of these uppity newcomers.

Because the sheep run uphill?

I take the blame for releasing this on mass to SL Aussies in the early hours of the morning. Original info came from the Sydney Morning Herald and after seeking out more info it looked as if it may have some truth to it. Its not BS and it is of concern. Of course there were 2 options say nothing and go on as if everything was great, but for me thats not the Aussie way. I personally felt, especially after speaking with LL, whom confirmed there knowledge of this, and reported to me that they were drafting a response on behalf of the residents to the AU Gov, that it was a good idea to rally some people, do some fact searching on mass, and begin a movement to prepare for the event should it be real, NO GOOD BEING UNPREPARED. as it worked out we have many differing reports coming back to the SAVE SL AUSTRALIA group, phone calls made to local MPs, with varying responses to actual dates of the classifications agenda being put into effect. Many still think it is not likely, as do i, though it is still possible. Until i see something in writing on a gov website that clearly states this will not happen, im not going to feel 100% at ease.And we all know the KEVIN07 machine certainly has enough webs implemented to do this. Better safe than sorry in my eyes. You know a lot of good people yesterday took a lot of RL time to research facts contact MP's draft responses and call together a response and research team. And not for the benefits of ourselves, for the benefits of all. CHeers from JInx

I will pass your group on to my Aussie friends.

Dusan Writer's Metaverse blog has picked up on this. Not sure it adds much new info or debate, but it is being talked about ...

http://dusanwriter.com/index.php/2009/06/25/australia-to-ban-second-life/

http://dusanwriter.com/index.php/2009/06/26/who-should-control-freedoms-in-virtual-worlds/

There hasn't been a "surplus" in - well, in my lifetime anyway. I forget when, offhand, but you gotta go back to before the 1960's for that - and if I remember right, it's closer to the 1860's.

Bush's 4 year deficit is now number 2. Second to Obama's current deficit - and we're not quite six months into his first four years. Check your facts.



Huh?

Even if that were possible, I'm not sure anyone could have known what to do or how to prepare for that. And definitely not within 9 months of taking office. Had he been powering down the military and making broad cuts in it, you may have a point, but...

I'm just gonna stay with my initial response to this one... "huh?" lol


True. There were definitely some controversial projects Bush didn't fund. And there was funding going to church groups. (There is money going to religious groups now, too, btw).

Obama is the one who funds science projects, but squashes the results if the science doesn't match his political agenda.
http://www.newsmax.com/us/EPA_climate_/2009/06/26/229332.html

The rest of your things were far to general to even bother trying to rebut.

Suffice it to say though - I firmly believe that ANY man who wants to be in politics is definitely NOT a man I want to have in politics. lol

Its good to see at least LL are prepared to draft a reply to the AU Gov. I sincerely hope that all Australian people here also lobby their MP's and their ISP's. I am so glad here in Holland the Government are not into the Nanny state nor likely to be. Good luck with getting fellow countrymen and ladies together

There are a couple problems with this. First off, Newsmax is a conservative news organization. What's the matter? Did Faux News not jump on this one?

Secondly, it was not Obama who "quashed" this. The report was authored by an economist/physicist. I highly doubt the the environment is high on his list of expertise. Real experts that are actual scientists (and not religious and conservative nutjobs) are mostly in line with that horrible little idea of global warming. And my mostly, I mean an overwhelming majority. Kind of like the overwhelming majority of scientists who consider evolution a valid theory.

When you bring up science and political parties, how many Democrats believe that evolution is a hoax and that the earth is 4-6000 years old? Now, how may Republicans believe that garbage?

Should we visit stem cell research as well?

Republicans by and large are way behind the democrats in the world of science, unless it comes to weapons.

I don't have the time or inclination to debate your other points, but this one I could not let slide.

Although there is that little report that Richard Clarke filed that warned of impending terrorist attacks involving....*gasps*....Al Qaeda!! Wow...I think we might have been wise to read that one, but they dismissed Al Qaeda as not an organization worth worrying about

Almost, cuz it makes them push back better.

Lame argument.

News outlets these days are Liberal or Conservative and the number of liberal media outlets throughout the U.S. completely outnumber the conservative media outlets 100 to 1, and in other countries it is even worse.

Fox news being the #1 U.S. media outlet for Conservative news is of course always slammed, but MSNObamaBC or ABC or CBS or CNN, et al are all liberal outlets, and yet you knock Fox news as if the others are anymore truthful...

Now that is naive if ever seen it.

Bullshit. How liberal do you think a news organization is that is owned by General Electric or Viacom? One of the big lies of our time is about the "liberal media." Any critical thinking would dispel that pile of crap.

Faux News is a joke, end of story. Hannity is so pathetic that he makes O'Reilly look almost professional, which of course is not true.

In order to find true liberal media, you'd have to go online to Huffington Post or Alternet. I do read them, but I also understand that they come from a liberal POV. The major networks are closer to conservative than liberal. CNN is probably a bit more liberal. Faux...well......it's good for a laugh.

LOL. Ok.

General Electric owns NBC. General Electric is dependent on the U.S. govt for military contracts. NBC is Obama's biggest media supporter.

"Critical thinking"

LOL. Whatever.

Journalism is dead.

I am not going to argue about news media outlets with someone who thinks they are unbiased or that the Huffington Post is the only "true liberal" media.

Statist suck.

I didn't say that at all.

Nice try though.

General Electric....

QFT

And ya, NBC is very liberal.

"One of the biggest lies of our time is about the liberal media"???? LOL!!!! Try your own advice.