Why Does Facebook Block Any Mention Of BugMeNot?
from the waste-of-time dept
Remember back about four years ago when all sorts of online publishers relied on bogus registrations and freaked out about services like BugMeNot that required registration? Over the past few years, BugMeNot has become a lot less essential, because a lot of publications have been getting rid of registration walls or at least providing real value for registering, rather than just forcing you to input bogus info. However, apparently the folks over at Facebook are so against the concept of BugMeNot they won't even let you mention it (via Slashdot. Apparently, if you mention BugMeNot.com in your status message, Facebook warns you that the "message contains blocked content." I guess that's what you get for relying on a messaging system controlled by someone else, but it still seems like a bizarre thing for Facebook to block.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bans, bugmenot, communication
Companies: facebook
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
BugMeNot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BugMeNot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: BugMeNot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BugMeNot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BugMeNot
Wow, ever actually read the Constitution?
The 1st Amendment only protects against government censorship. It has no bearing on the actions of a privately owned web site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: BugMeNot
> only protects against government
> It has no bearing on the actions of a privately owned web site
Oh, really?
So when your "privately owned" company also decides it won't hire "Negroes" then what?
GOTCHA!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facebook hates anon e-mail
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Registrations
They believe they're providing a lot of good content in exchange for a valid registration (which they don't spam). If the user doesn't live up to his side of the bargin, then they feel they're justified in cutting him off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Registrations
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's kinda funny actually because now more people are going to know about the site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think they fixed it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bugmenot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Meaning you can criticize your gov't and you won't goto(sic) jail."
Seriously? Really? You believe that?
Go ahead, criticize the stupid fluff bullshit which gets bandied around day-in and day-out--nobody cares.
But, get close to the truth and mention to the wrong person how your government is wrong and see how fast you become a "terrorist" in charge of some plot (which you've never heard of) and then it's just capture you (you terrorist fuck) and ship you off to Guantanamo Bay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
> how your government is wrong
And what "truth" might that be? I want to put your little theory to the test.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I suspect that might be any truth that those with sufficient authority find to be sufficiently threatening to such authority. You can take it from there.
I want to put your little theory to the test.
Go ahead. They'll keep the light on for you at Gitmo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funny thing is asda.com is the site for one of the top 3 supermarket chains in the UK
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I've got another news flash for you, John Doe is a legitimate name. You may not like it, but that's not the point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You have the right to say almost everything you want, but Facebook doesn't have any obligation to publish it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not blocked
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mailinator FTW
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's what I do...
/And when they do send me e-mail crap..I list it as 'spam'. Let the big boys at Google deal with them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tech Solution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tech Solution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shouldn't That Be Rephrased As ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ha ha GOTCHA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EEBIE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No more blocked bugmenot!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
surveilance
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facebook Mention Tagging Blocker
It's available now in chrome store: http://goo.gl/LNpIVq
[ link to this | view in chronology ]