Not if the free-loaders have any say about it, and brother, they will not shut up. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, “when you cut the head off the serpent two more shall replace it“.
True to form, each head we lop off seems to simply provoke the beast further.
In this case the latest bill the spring forth from the carnage as a likely candidate for passing (with over 100 co-sponsors) is called the Rogers-Ruppersberger bill, also known as CISPA or HR 3523.
The HR 3523 bill is so bad that it’s made the ACLU’s comparison chart of ‘Information Legislation’ bills. This PDF is an excellent way to see how each bill will effect information flow and the freedom of on-line communications.
Yes this is another ‘we must act now’ moments.. If you are growing tired of them then the only recourse is to go for the heart of the beast until it stops sticking it’s heads where they don’t belong.
Facebook Access for Employers
Did this actually happen? Has the world really gone nuts?
According to articles on-line that have been popping up all morning, Kimberly Hester, a teaching aid, has been ‘fired’ for refusing to grant access to a private photo inside her Facebook account.
Kimberly Hester (pictured above) was called into the superintendents office to investigate claims that one of her private Facebook photos was inappropriate.
After three requests for access to her Facebook account that she refused to comply with, the decision was made to ‘presume guilt’ lacking further information, and to her employment was terminated.
The picture has made it’s way on-line and it’s just a blurry image of a co-workers pants, around her ankles. For all we know the co-worker was wearing a skirt, shorts, etc., and there’s nothing at all ‘wrong’ with the photo in terms of ‘appropriate content’.
Clearly what we have here is a school superintendent that likes to pay legal fees for trampling the rights of it’s workers?
Anyone who has read Facebook’s Terms of Service/End User Agreement knows that it’s a CLEAR violation of their policies to allow someone else to knowingly access your account. By asking Kimberly for access, the superintendent is actually risking the loss of Kimberly’s private Facebook account based on the allegation that anyone who has access might see something inappropriate.
That’s like saying that I had a friend over who saw a private picture on my mantle of what looked like a pair of naked legs in some pants, so they told my boss, and now my boss needs to fire me because I refuse to give him a key to my house so he can come over and look at things?
And finally, what is going on with the mother that had earned a ‘friendship’ status with Kimberly on Facebook? At what point do you go after someone’s job vs. speaking to them about something like a decent human being?
We clearly can’t stop here..