Official TFN policy for dealing with inappropriate action

It is privately owned, yet anyone can access it, regardless of "membership" or not. Since that is the case, doesn't then the laws of the land supercede the ownership of the individual?

 

Since that is the case, doesn't then the laws of the land supercede the ownership of the individual?

No, not really. It has simply been opened up to people in general.

 

I think it needs to be stated then that said user has NO rights when they join TFN. As stated right now, the TOS are ambigous at best. As of right now, it is a gigantic legal loophole that TFN has established for itself.

Let's see:

User acknowledges and agrees that the use of the Jedi Council Forums is a privilege, not a right, and that the administration of the Jedi Council has the right, at its sole discretion, to revoke this privilege at any time without notice should the administration deem it necessary. User agrees that this Agreement in its entirety applies to both public and private messages.

That's the first paragraph of the TOS. That is about as clear as you can get of a statement that you have no rights. Your "right" to use this board can be revoked at any time because it is a privlege, not a right.

Kimball Kinnison

 

And this TOS is no different than nearly all those out there. We just happen to attract the Supreme Court lawyers to this site.

 

But then since you automatically open your site to the public in general, 1st and 4th Amendments should apply.

For instance, you cannot turn your back on a request for membership to TFN based upon race or creed. That is simply not allowed because it is against the law. Private organizations can restrict membership to whoever you want based upon any qualification. However, TFN cannot get away with that. And since they can't, it is by definition public.


Kimball_Kinnison

As far as I am concerned, that paragraph is full of legal loopholes specifically for TFN's benefit. Nowhere does it say that you have no privacy on TFN. It may seem to some that paragraph is ironclad. I believe it is purposely ambiguous.

 

"It is privately owned, yet anyone can access it, regardless of "membership" or not. Since that is the case, doesn't then the laws of the land supercede the ownership of the individual?"

Not at all. The server is privately owned. Let's say I planted some flowers in front of my house. Anyone can "access" or see the flowers, but that doesn't supercede my ownership of the flowers. Just because something is publically viewable or accessable doesn't mean that the owner has no rights.

Edit:
"For instance, you cannot turn your back on a request for membership to TFN based upon race or creed. That is simply not allowed because it is against the law. Private organizations can restrict membership to whoever you want based upon any qualification. However, TFN cannot get away with that. And since they can't, it is by definition public."

Not saying that we would, but who says that we couldn't do that?

 

TOS are ambigous at best.

Errrr.. no.

Edit:

KimballK beat me to it.

Looks pretty black and grey to me, and that's on the front page of the TOS... you don't even have to dig for it.

 

But then since you automatically open your site to the public in general, 1st and 4th Amendments should apply.

For instance, you cannot turn your back on a request for membership to TFN based upon race or creed. That is simply not allowed because it is against the law. Private organizations can restrict membership to whoever you want based upon any qualification. However, TFN cannot get away with that. And since they can't, it is by definition public.

Bwahahahaha...

Oh, wait.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...

Patently untrue.

First, the ridiculousness of Amendments 1 and 4.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "

We're not Congress.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Again, we're not the government AND you agree to the TOS everytime you post. Thus, you lose.

And AGAIN, we (well, Josh or Phillip) has the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to refuse service to any race, creed, gender, mutant, geek, etc. that they so desire.

WHY?

Because this is a privately-run, privately-funded, privately-owned site that can do whatever it wants. Proof: Augusta National.

However, they CHOOSE to have the site open to the public (above 13 years of age for COPPA reasons).

 

This is a private site. There is no legal recourse to change things. So try other avenues.

 

Like bringing up the same thing periodically again and again in Comms? Like never accepting the answer no matter how many mods from different forums give you that answer? Give me some traffic cones and a map so I can block off that avenue. I hate that route. It was old years ago.

 

jedi-ES...
"But then since you automatically open your site to the public in general, 1st..."

1st Amendment...
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of..."

In case you have completely misunderstood where you're at, the Jedi Council forums of theforce.net is not the U.S. Congress.

 

If memory serves me right, doesn't the exchange of money qualify a group as private?

If you want private status, charge $1 dollar for a lifetime subscription.

Because this is a privately-run, privately-funded, privately-owned site that can do whatever it wants. Proof: Augusta National.

However, they CHOOSE to have the site open to the public (above 13 years of age for COPPA reasons).

How is it privately funded if TFN accepts advertising?

And since TFN chooses to be open to the public, you cannot hold onto your private status.

,

 

And since TFN chooses to be open to the public, you cannot hold onto your private status.

And using this (il-)logic we can open the floodgates to all sorts of posters and subjects... lets bring on the porn sites... the Matrix sites... Even *GASP* the DREADED KLINGONS

 

As far as I am concerned, that paragraph is full of legal loopholes specifically for TFN's benefit. Nowhere does it say that you have no privacy on TFN. It may seem to some that paragraph is ironclad. I believe it is purposely ambiguous.

Fine. Let's look at the third paragraph then.

The Jedi Council Administration has the right but not the obligation to monitor and/or moderate the Forums, and offers no assurances in this regard.

Remember that last sentence of the first paragraph?

User agrees that this Agreement in its entirety applies to both public and private messages.

It is spelled out quite clearly that the Administration has the right to monitor the boards including private messages. There are no loopholes in that. No one forces you to come here and post. However, by posting you have made a legally binding agreement to abide by the TOS. That has been upheld repeatedly for other message boards.

There are no loopholes.

Kimball Kinnison

 

Sape: yes, that is one route. However, the only way to close it off is to shut down comms

 

And since TFN chooses to be open to the public, you cannot hold onto your private status.


That this is a private site has been an established fact for a long time now, regardless of whether people agree with TFN's policies.

 

"If memory serves me right, doesn't the exchange of money qualify a group as private?"

So, if I want to consider my house "private", I have to charge all of my friends $1 for a "lifetime membership"?

 

Do you take credit cards only YJ?

 

No, we wouldn't shut down 'Comms'. The 'forum' isn't the problem.

You know the story of Chicken Little? Do you realize how many threads like this over the years you've either started or been a part of? People, mods and non-mods alike, start to tune it out. We see an agenda, not a love for the boards and a willingness to paticipate to improve things. Merely jabs and digs. So although you think you're the rally point spokesman for the down-trodden and Mod-abused users, you're actually hurting your cause.

 

You only see what you want to see. I lack tact, yes, but I'm not trying to destroy the JC. The only agenda I have is to change what I see as unjust rules, because I want the JC to be a better place. I've already told you not to take what I say personally.


And why are you bringing this up in a thread that has nothing to do with me? ?

 

*hands YJ a dollar*

Party at YJ's house! I've got the keg! Calling several hot women for him and hot men for Breezy and me!

 

[mirror] You only see what you want to see. [/mirror]

 

YodaJeff

You aren't a membership group, you are a person. And you aren't inviting the entire public into your house - so it couldn't be established that your house is public until you charge, making it private.



Sapient


So what's the double standard here? If you can call me Chicken Little, can I call you something?


I am asking questions, not baiting or name calling - yet that is all I receive in kind. Very interesting.

 

He called me Chicken Little, not you.

So who wants to see if I taste like chicken?

 

Your constitutional arguments are severely lacking.

For example, if I open a local newspaper that is 100% supported by advertising, I am allowed to decide what goes into it. It is still privately owned, and I can reject whatever stories I want, or edit the stories I am given.

Just because something is open to the public does not mean that it forces certain rules onto it. Believe me, I have been involved in many online boards in the past and am well acquainted with the legal issues surrounding them. The TOS are binding and give the administration the authority to access any information contained on the server, whether in a post or a PM.

Kimball Kinnison