Which ?may? lead to a site "whose name we dare not speak?... which loads only if "http://www." is removed from it... and then displays message:
"Down until 4/19/08 due to bandwidth limitations!
Want to advertise?"
This entire discussion is feeling very surreal - with innuendos about poison-named domains that ban one's account. I do like the idea of openness about banning policies. Why force people to stumble around in the dark and then be punished when they step in the dog piles?
[Or is there a concern about legal concerns if one "vilifies" a site by pronouncing it banned?]
That particular site had the Rickroll video and a nasty series of infinite javascript popups. So yes, I was Rickroll'd by Paul Graham, and it crashed my browser.
Comments
http://tinyurl.com/22q5z9
Which ?may? lead to a site "whose name we dare not speak?... which loads only if "http://www." is removed from it... and then displays message:
"Down until 4/19/08 due to bandwidth limitations!
Want to advertise?"
This entire discussion is feeling very surreal - with innuendos about poison-named domains that ban one's account. I do like the idea of openness about banning policies. Why force people to stumble around in the dark and then be punished when they step in the dog piles?
[Or is there a concern about legal concerns if one "vilifies" a site by pronouncing it banned?]
I can't see the site, but it looks like some kind of dumb meme:
http://images.google.com.au/images?q=internet%20serious%20bu...
I don't understand the joke. Can someone please explain?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=THE%20INTERNE...
It's an Internet meme.
That particular site had the Rickroll video and a nasty series of infinite javascript popups. So yes, I was Rickroll'd by Paul Graham, and it crashed my browser.