Lies in the Media

So this morning I came across another rant-topic and this is aimed particularly at Christian broadcasters, but also at the media in general.

Lies within the media are probably the biggest reason why few people pay attention and why those who do are so misled or uninformed about the reality of the world today.

The case in point is the story told on a Christian Radio station this morning: A child goes to school for the first time and coming home after their first day the parent asks the child what they learnt. The child replies “I learnt that there is no way to prove that Jesus ever existed!”

There are several problems with this story, allow me to outline them.

Firstly, let us look at the first day of school logically. Elementary school is primarily for learning the basic subjects – English, Math, etc. Theological debates or discussions typically wouldn’t occur until at least Middle School, or more likely High School.

Even then, and this becomes the second point, they cannot be initiated by a teacher. The teacher may prompt, but cannot explicitly begin a discussion. The teacher also cannot teach their personal beliefs as fact. If it isn’t in the curriculum, it isn’t being taught. And if it is it should be being reported to the appropriate authority, and not reported on by the media.

This has been a trend for the longest time and it’s not just within the media, it’s by word of mouth also. Here are 3 simple ways to check if what you’ve heard is true:

  1. Look at it logically. If you add 2 and 2 and get 5 while you’re looking at the statement, there is something wrong.
  2. Research it. Whether online, in the library, or discussing with others who know or have experience, find out more about things rather than just mindlessly repeating stories in a chinese-whispers fashion.
  3. Ask the person who told you what proof they have. If a person is just passing on a story, there is every possibility that it is not 100% true.

In the case of the story above, it is possible that aspects of it are true, but if mis-told down the line then it becomes what it is today. Consider a High School student on the last day, happening on a theological debate where the comment arises – that it is possible Jesus was not a real person. The student comes home and tells mom and dad. The parents tell the story to a few people that the student was taught Jesus wasn’t real. Keep this going down the grapevine and it only takes a few steps with mis-tellings, incorrect recallings of the story etc and it becomes a 5 year old going to Elementary being taught as fact on the first day.

It seems silly but if you’ve ever played “Chinese Whispers,” or even just observed people in groups, you’ll realize it translates into reality dangerously closely. Next time you receive a “Hey check this out” email, go and take a look at Snopes website, an amazing resource for finding out if the rumor being spread is true, false, a combination or was unverifiable. A good 90% of emails I receive like this are either blatantly false, or are mostly false merely with enough elements of truth to be believable.

Here are some common examples, particularly related to the religious group:

As you can see from the written evidence these are all lies, and from a little research and/or thinking it can be proven in quite simple terms that the claim is false.

My plea to the Christian community, to the media, stop mindlessly passing on stories, stop making up stories that could be taken as fact, in all seriousness it just makes us look bad that so many are so gullible, and makes the truth look that much less truthful.

The Joys of Becoming COPPA Compliant

One of the IRC Networks I work with (UCCN) is looking at a proposal drawn up recently to allow children under 13 to join us and chat on the network. To begin with, it looked very difficult to do this in a law abiding manner. Then it looked really easy. After studying the “How to Comply” page on the FTC site, it turns out it is somewhere in the middle.

While it will indeed require some changes in the network configuration, as well as in staff policies and such, the most difficult aspect is the consent phase. Ensuring that parents are who they say they are (or at least having a record that verifies to a legal standard that they are who they say they are) is the hardest thing to do.

All in all, the best method found so far is a signed form from the parent sent by post, or by fax. For our purposes, this will also hold some verification information, and technical details regarding the children in particular.

It also means network changes, only permitting underage users to do specific things, and blocking anything else that might endanger them, or that would be out of our control as administrators, and their guardians while on the network.

The other difficulty is going to be designing and building a secure database system for storing the personal information, that will log who accesses what. This is one of my areas of expertise, however, so it shouldn’t be too high on the hard-scale.

Unwritten Rules

This is a rant, but it will be short.

What I’m fed up with recently, is.. “Law Enforcers” who enforce rules or laws that weren’t publicised.

A police officer arresting someone for doing something within the law is likely to face disciplinary action. However, police officers, parents, other authority figures regularly make requests regarding rules that they have never told their subjects about, and expect us to follow their requests, simply because they are in authority and we are not. That, I believe, is an abuse of power.

I made mention in my Letter to the Christian Internet Community, to a particular legal rule about IRC users under the age of 13. The network that enforced this rule has made no publication (as to date) of this particular rule on its website, on either of its widely advertised webpages of rules, or in its MOTD, viewable on connect.

I contacted the network, and they replied saying “Thanks for pointing this out” – another staff member followed up by saying “It’s in the Java chat, where most new users connect” – I still haven’t seen it, though I concede I wasn’t looking hard.

Today, it happened again. Same place, probably same op, this time asked me to remove a clone. I considered my options, and decided to save everyone some hassle and go with it. I then went and looked up the rules – and once again, there was no mention of it. The closest I could find was a rule against CloneBots, which, ladies and gentlemen, are not the same as a simple clone. The purpose of a clonebot (and the reason for banning them) is to make multiple connections from the same location, and flood a network or channel or server (not just IRC, can include web and mail sometimes also) – causing as much disruption as possible, whether it be by flooding text, flooding join/part, anything that prevents the server from being utilised as it was intended. The reason for cloning is that most flood protection systems will prevent against a single user, however if all the clones are individually not flooding, only causing disruption as a whole, they manage to stay online a little longer.

This is not my reason for cloning. My reason for cloning is simple, really. I have 2 computers that I regularly move between, one is a desktop, and is stationary at my house. When I’m at home, I use this in my living room. When I’m out, or in the bedroom, or anywhere I don’t feel like sitting in the desk chair, I use the macbook, and chat there. Sometimes, and this happens more than most might believe, I move between them quite a bit in short spaces of time. To save everyone disruption, and prevent my own confusion, I tend to leave both logged in at the same time.

This is going to be raised, once again with CCNet, and I will put to them two questions – if it’s for the purpose of saving problems rather than causing them, is it such an issue, and secondly, if it’s not a stated rule – why is it being enforced?

An authority figure making a request regarding a rule that they have never mentioned before, and expecting us to follow their requests, simply because they are in authority and we are not, I believe, is an abuse of power.

Letter to the Christian Internet Community

Prologue:

For the longest time, Christian IRC channels and networks have been targets for individuals looking to become power-hungry by getting onto staff, for dirty old men to pick up gullible teenage (or even pre-teen) girls (or boys) for a dirty evening of dirtiness, for annoying losers with too much time looking for an argument, or merely looking to annoy as many people as possible. They have been sought by people legitimately looking for help, for spiritual guidance, for a replacement to a real church with physical fellow-shipping, whether that be for lack of acceptance in their church, lack of ability to go to a church (e.g. physical and/or mental disabilities), or laziness.

Personally, I don’t feel the Christian IRC community (or the church as a whole) takes all of these seriously enough, nor does it allow for open discussion of certain topics deemed inappropriate for whatever reason. I believe the Christian Internet Community as a whole needs to work together more to promote our God in a positive manner, without the unnecessary bad-press created by negligence, by arrogance, by meanness, by downright idiocy and stupidity.

Not that I like telling the world how to change, in this post I will outline how and why I feel the Christian Community on the Internet needs to change, with a strong focus towards the IRC community. To the owners, to the operators, to the users, and to the attackers and disrupters, this is my letter to you all.

Continue reading

Migration of the Masses

Prologue:

I realized, through writing this, why so little is done about immigration issues. It is almost impossible to make any changes without someone, somewhere, becoming very offended. Whether it is the racist voters who threaten to vote against anyone who makes it easier for the “damn Mexicans” to “take our jobs!” (working in chicken plants, or as janitors, or other such lowly jobs as their communities end up working in). Or if it is those who feel that they are people just like everyone else, who have every right to live on the land and breathe the air, and be unpunished, despite breaking a large number of laws (illegal border crossings, the various fake and/or forged documentations, etc). It doesn’t seem overly difficult to cross the border already, and any change that makes it easier for anyone to enter the country increases the chance of ‘terrorists’ slipping through cracks, generating a security risk. I understand that what I outline is not a perfect solution, but I believe it should be at least considered, and adjusted as appropriate for implementation. But hey, what do I know – an outsider, an immigrant myself, albeit a legal one.

Continue reading

Pleasing response to a complaint

This is the kind of response that all organisations dealing with complaints should take notes from.

CCNet, or the Christian Chat Network, is well known in many circles as being very strict regarding rules and enforcements. For a long time, one could expect that even for writing this, I would be banned for a month, no questions asked.

Allow me to outline the complaint I had.

Here are my (edited outside chatter) logs from earlier today.

Jul 31 12:21:59 <Guest26178> this site is ok, but it is bare bones.
Jul 31 12:22:05 <PurpleHighlights> it’s been almost a year now I think since I’ve been on Second Life
Jul 31 12:22:12 <Kathe> whats second life?
Jul 31 12:22:18 <BrianB> it’s an online virtual world
Jul 31 12:22:23 <BrianB> i created an account and never used it
Jul 31 12:22:32 <Guest26178> they have come out with a new browser for it.
Jul 31 12:22:39 <Guest26178> it is free for basic membership
Jul 31 12:22:40 <Kathe> well i’m sorry you don’t like the set up here Guest26178
Jul 31 12:22:43 <Guest26178> but you can’t own land.
Jul 31 12:22:51 <Guest26178> it is ok
Jul 31 12:22:51 <PurpleHighlights> though for the other membership you pay, the basic is free
Jul 31 12:22:55 <Guest26178> for what it does
Jul 31 12:23:02 <BrianB> secondlife isn’t exactly moderated either
Jul 31 12:23:11 <BrianB> in fact there have been law suits over people’s, uh, “actions” in the game…
Jul 31 12:23:12 <PurpleHighlights> I’ve payed for imvu, I got hooked on imvu & bought my avatar, now a vip member have a access pass
Jul 31 12:23:17 <Guest26178> well Brian, you can get banned in SL. So it is moderated.
Jul 31 12:23:29 <BrianB> it isn’t moderated like this place
Jul 31 12:23:36 <PurpleHighlights> yes ppl can also get banned from imvu if they’re not careful
Jul 31 12:23:40 * Kathe things ccnet has enough ‘characters’ for her
Jul 31 12:23:45 <Guest26178> to use second life you need to download their browser.
Jul 31 12:24:01 <BrianB> well i was on IMVU last night and about fell over when i saw the first chatter’s nickname that i ran into, very ugly
Jul 31 12:24:04 <PurpleHighlights> I’ve had a friend banned from imvu, I don’t know what she did or said, but she went against the imvu tos
Jul 31 12:24:17 <BrianB> that’s why i chat here, it is safer 🙂
Jul 31 12:25:08 <Guest26178> here is an example of what you can do in SL.
Jul 31 12:25:27 <All_TGB_to_God_[Deut_18_13]> and btw….
Jul 31 12:25:32 <Guest26178> I went there one Sat. night and there was a Christian concert going on.
Jul 31 12:25:35 <All_TGB_to_God_[Deut_18_13]> i think ShoutLife is much better….
Jul 31 12:25:41 <BrianB> well
Jul 31 12:25:45 <All_TGB_to_God_[Deut_18_13]> even though i have never been to SecondLife, though…
Jul 31 12:25:46 <All_TGB_to_God_[Deut_18_13]> BUT..
Jul 31 12:25:51 <Guest26178> you sat in an ampitheater and watched it on a big screen.
Jul 31 12:25:53 <BrianB> the problem is waht else gose on around you….
Jul 31 12:25:55 <All_TGB_to_God_[Deut_18_13]> i really do like it HERE, though !! 🙂
Jul 31 12:25:59 <BrianB> that’s why we keep a clean environment

Continue reading