"Warning: another long post. Please feel inclined to use the ""Print"" feature, shown immediately above this message, as you wish, for easier reading?

As I mentioned before, I am not a lawyer. As for the ISP, each company has there own corporate policy for this and likewise in turn a ""usage policy"" for folks who use their service. The real concern here is abusive posters, is it not?

I know this whole internet thing can be a bit of a mystery and discussing the IP address matter rather arcane to most. I could be wrong, but that is the impression I get reading these posts. It's new and largely unfamiliar software to many. It's more than understandable some may be a bit uncomfortable, skeptical, or suspicious about the new message board. Hopefully, while trying to keep ""geek speak"" level down as much as possible and achieve success in removing any lagging mysteries concerning this IP tracking concern and improve the comfort level with this new message board.

In a nutshell, you (more specifically your service provider) voluntarily supply the IP (Internet Protocol) address to the web server every time you request a page through your web browser. This is true of nycc.org or any other site you visit. At the risk of being redundant, IP is the protocol of the Internet - that's how it works. All web sites will contain (or at least should) contain a log that tracks when and what pages are requested from their site. Log files are kept mainly for security reasons (to see if it is being hacked) as well as serving other purposes.

This message board's format provides all of the pertinent ""log file"" details with each posted message, namely the following:
- IP address
- ""User agent""
- Date/time stamp

(The ""user agent"" field is part of the protocol and is basic, mundane information about your web browser - what brand, version, PC or MAC, etc. More on this latter).

In your example, this is all the information law enforcement needs to start pursuing their subject. In short, I'm keeping nothing up my sleeve. What you see is the same pertinent info the web admin has access to. It's all public info.

The idea of displaying the IP address is one of democratization - a form of checks and balances. The NYCC is a club - which implies some form of a cohesive community. Why not let the community govern itself? As mentioned in my previous post, all of the information contained in the message, including the IP address is enough information to empower its participants to do so.

If it is a real egregious post (refer to Mr. Rosenthal's post for an unabridged definition), like the recent ""F. You T. L."" post well then of course naturally it's going to get removed ASAP. Posts that are more like sore thumbs, well then, I guess will be at the mercy of your peers who read the posts. How may be possible is outlined in my long Welcome thread post.

Just follow the ""Golden Rule"" when you post - or more plainly don't write stuff that you wouldn't say to someone in person and everything will be OK. Who could take issue with that? The message board-posting paradigm here I think is analogous to one who makes prank telephone calls. If you get one or two or perhaps three prank calls, most likely you just hang up and ignore it. If it starts getting on your nerves and becomes more trouble than its worth, well then, I think it is a safe bet you are going to take action. Likewise, I am willing to bet the same is true with not-so-anonymous message board trolls. Toss enough flames, eventually they will blow back in their embarrassed, red face. With the IP address *you* are now empowered to take action and expose their true identity. Hopefully, there will be no need for this ever.

There is another part of the IP addresses' checks 'n balance. A benefit not discussed before. Combine the IP address and the ""User Agent"" (browser info), it is one that protect"

nm

The many freedoms which comprise the Bill of Rights (i.e., the first 10 amendments of the Constitution) are rights that citizens have against the government - not against private citizens or groups. This is why the first amendment (largely) prohibits the government from censoring speech but does not stop your private employer from doing so. Similarly, the protections (in the fifth amendment, I think) against unlawful searches (which is how you might categorize the tracking of posts) restrict the actions of the government and not, for the most part, the actions of a private group like the NYCC. (Keep in mind that the above is a huge generalization, but gives you a sense of why the NYCC can track posts with virtual impugnity.)

Hey, that ain't me. I'm no litigator!

El Jefe's the bomb! See you on the road, Jeff.

- Charlie

"I don't know what the anonymous writer, seemingly a lawyer, was writing about or what he was responding to when he stated:

""Legally, consideration must be given to tortious interference and prima facie tort, where malice of the publisher is a factor and the truth of the content of the publication is not controlling.""

...But I sure would be interested in learning of a situation in which publishing the truth is actionable (unless it is in contravention of an injunction or a court ukase). Please educate me.

Richard









"