Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: ISP Filtering Trial

  1. #1
    Member statesmanjeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    391
    Thanks
    95
    Thanked 31 Times in 20 Posts
    Rep Power
    213
    Reputation
    462

    Default ISP Filtering Trial

    Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has urged internet service providers (ISP) and mobile telephone operators to participate in a live trial of the government's proposed internet filtering system.

    What ISP's are supporting this.
    Whats the chance of them getting it passed if in house trials worked.

    Could this actually happen?



Look Here ->
  • #2
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    56
    Posts
    31,150
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 13,731 Times in 5,823 Posts
    Rep Power
    4552
    Reputation
    165805

    Default

    Click on the " nocleanfeed " button at the bottom left of this page.

    Its a very real issue and one that we all need to stand up against. The Rudd Government appears to want to join China and North Korea in censoring what its citizens can and cannot read.

    If it wasnt so serious it would be laughable

  • #3
    Senior Member
    LeroyPatrol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    N.E. Vic
    Posts
    16,229
    Thanks
    3,528
    Thanked 4,710 Times in 2,797 Posts
    Rep Power
    1669
    Reputation
    46551

    Default

    It's almost like we live in a communist society sometimes....

    Leroy

  • #4
    Senior Member
    fandtm666's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,502
    Thanks
    244
    Thanked 990 Times in 465 Posts
    Rep Power
    1189
    Reputation
    40447

    Default

    and here they were calling china a nazi state during the Olympics and saying they have no right in todays modern society to do what the did and yet here is the great aussi government about to try and implement a version that is only rivaled by that of iran ( the worst in the world for net filtering)

  • #5
    Senior Member cwispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    In bed sleeping
    Posts
    1,090
    Thanks
    140
    Thanked 296 Times in 114 Posts
    Rep Power
    265
    Reputation
    1581

    Default

    If we dont get it stopped it will put Australia back 20 years in scientific research alone.
    What would you do if your server was stolen or failed beyond repair?
    http://www.2000cn.com.au/shadowprotect.html

  • #6
    Senior Member
    mango's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    QLD
    Posts
    3,159
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 1,048 Times in 533 Posts
    Rep Power
    453
    Reputation
    7506

    Default

    what else do u expect from the labor ( communist ) party.

  • #7
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    It is a very real threat and what’s more the government have said it is OK if ISP’s pass on the cost of doing it to consumers. I had no problem with it when they first talked about it when you could opt out of the filter entirely but now it seems they want a basic filter to stop anyone looking at what they deem undesirable. The list of what is filtered will be secret too.

    I just hope when Rudd is driven from office that the new government removes this insult to Australian internet users.

    They say they will block child sex sites. I have no problem with that but I would expect that is just the start and interest groups will lobby for other things being added. Is Austech and illegal site there is a lot of discussion re pay-tv crypto. Should I be stopped from looking at Russian language hacker sites while I research stuff on root kits etc. How do they know why I visit these? Perhaps in future a permit might be needed which other than being a pain is the rear would red flag anyone successfully connecting to these sites from Oz.

    It is just pathetic Rudd is crud.

    With thanks to Whirlpool for this example image.


  • #8
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    56
    Posts
    31,150
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 13,731 Times in 5,823 Posts
    Rep Power
    4552
    Reputation
    165805

    Default

    A major problem is they refuse to say exactly what they are going to block. What a government deems to be illegal and what we think is illegal may be 2 entirely different things. As System Rat mentioned , is Austech an illegal site under the governments new system ? No one knows because the government wont tell anyone. It might also be handy for blocking your political opponenets views.

    A nation wide filter will slow connections speeds as well and as they have already said , its compolsory not optional. This really is as bad as it gets from a government.....what next ? Screen phone calls ? Censor the TV and Radio in case they dont want us to access the content ?

    Senator Conroy is a moron ( he looks very much like Lloyd Christmas ( Jim Carrey ) from the movie Dumb and Dumber ) and I can remember trying to deal with him when he was the Superannuation Officer for the Victorian Branch of the Transport Workers Union in the early 90's. He got the job via the Labor Party and did absolutely nothing for his pay check other than do political work for Labor. He was never in his office and his union mobile was permanently diverted to message bank and he would never return your calls.

    And this dill has the countries communications in his hands......*cringe

  • #9
    Senior Member ozchips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ipswich QLD
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,515
    Thanks
    153
    Thanked 418 Times in 197 Posts
    Rep Power
    322
    Reputation
    2059

    Default

    I know that we have no provision for freedom of speech in our constitution . However there is an 'implied freedom of political communication' , could this be deemed as against that ?

  • #10
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    Unfortunately, it is up to them to interpret what is and what is not. To challenge that would require lots of money in court. An example is low range speed enforcement in Victoria. They ping you for a few kmh over the limit, which reaps the government millions in revenue. If you challenge the validity of doing this vs. things that would really make the roads safer than your labelled as being against road safety. I imagin they will sell this the same way – Oh, you oppose the filter, which will stop kiddie porn you must be a bad person. I despise paedophiles just like 99.9% of the population but that will not matter.

    Once this thing is in place they will be able to block what they please depending on the whims of these in control of it. The majority of peer-to-peer traffic is copyright infringing material why would the owners of that not ask and lobby the government to block it.

  • #11
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    56
    Posts
    31,150
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 13,731 Times in 5,823 Posts
    Rep Power
    4552
    Reputation
    165805

    Default

    Here is the latest on it from Australian IT :

    Canberra calls net filter trialFont Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print Fran Foo | November 11, 2008
    THE federal Government has released details of its long-awaited call for expressions of interest on live internet-service-provider content filtering trials.

    The Government is asking all ISPs to participate, as their feedback is important.

    Child protection group Child Wise welcomed the news, but a technical group has dubbed the venture a risky business for ISPs.

    BigPond, the nation's largest internet service provider, is reviewing the call's terms and conditions before making a decision.

    The Government, through the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), has completed closed lab trials of ISP content filtering conducted by Enex TestLab. The live trial, however, is the first step towards evaluating whether ISP-level content filtering is feasible in Australia.

    "The participation of industry is crucial to providing evidence on the real-world impacts for ISP content filtering, including on ISPs and their customers," the government document, released yesterday, says.

    ISPs have until December 8 to submit their applications.

    The intention of the live pilot - also managed by Enex TestLab - is to assess the impact of ISP content filtering on fixed and mobile internet access devices.

    The live pilot is scheduled to begin before the end of the year, but ISPs will be able to start later, preferably before Christmas eve.

    "Ideally, ISPs will participate in the pilot for a minimum of six weeks," the document says.

    "ISPs that commence earlier will have the discretion to participate in the pilot until its conclusion."

    The Government plans to have two streams of filtered content.

    The mandatory portion will adhere to a blacklist of thousands of illegal web pages managed by ACMA and an optional clean feed of URLs that would automatically censor content, mostly adult material.

    "The Government intends to take an evidence-based approach to content filtering at the ISP level and is committed to working closely with industry to address any concerns, including costs and impacts on internet speeds," the Communications Department said.

    "These concerns will be carefully considered during a live pilot of ISP filtering, which will test a range of content filtering solutions in a real-world environment, with the co-operation of ISPs (including mobile telephone operators) and their customers.

    "The outcomes of the pilot will inform the Government's decision-making on the ISP filtering framework."

    A spokesman for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said the Government had been working with ISPs to develop the call for expressions of interest.

    Telstra, which runs the country's largest ISP, BigPond, has yet to decide whether to participate.

    "We're in the midst of reviewing the EOI document," Telstra spokesman Martin Barr said.

    Sage-Au, a not-for-profit professional organisation representing system administrators, said participating in the live trial at this stage was a big risk for ISPs.

    "It is a very important risk they take, as it is the participants in this trial that are likely to be able to make the biggest difference in discussions after the end of the trial," Sage-Au president Donna Ashelford said. "On the other hand, if the live trial turns out to be a disaster, having their name associated with it - as promised in the EOI document - might be a dual-edged sword."

    Ms Ashelford pointed to technical weaknesses with the EOI, one example being that the live pilot would limit users to a maximum of 12Mbps.

    "Many users exceed 12Mbps right now. Some national broadband network proposals have involved technology that provides speeds up to 50Mbps.

    "How future-proof is the national broadband network supposed to be when filtering systems are virtually guaranteed to bottleneck the resulting network," she said.

    Ms Ashelford pointed to a part of the document on ACMA's role: "ACMA is responsible for maintaining the accuracy of the blacklist and the whole framework requires use of the ACMA blacklist as a mandatory requirement.

    "But who watches the watchers, and what methods are imagined for addressing inevitable inaccuracies in the ACMA blacklist?"

    Sage-Au has also proposed a three-pronged plan to keep the internet safe for families, as it supports any practical initiatives to protect children from viewing objectionable content on the web.

    Ms Ashelford said a family friendly ISP program run by the internet industry association lacked awareness and could do with a big push.

    She called on the Government to invest more in educating parents on cyber-safety. More funds should be allocated to organisations such as ACMA and the Australian Federal Police to identify and remove illegal content, usually hosted overseas, she said.

    Meanwhile, Child Wise chief executive Bernadette McMenamin described the release of the document EOI as "an excellent development".

    "It's a fair and inclusive process that ISPs can be part of," she said. "I wouldn't like to see anything but child sexual abuse sites blocked.

    "I like the two-tier approach of a mandatory, and opt-in and opt-out mechanism."

    However, any form of content filtering would have to accompanied by an extensive education campaign, she said

  • #12
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    56
    Posts
    31,150
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 13,731 Times in 5,823 Posts
    Rep Power
    4552
    Reputation
    165805

    Default

    Heres what readers of Australian IT think :

    jatoo of Brisbane
    5:45pm today
    This is an appalling idea, and I'm glad to hear so many people opposed to it. It won't help much, and anything it does do can be done in a better way (as people have said, with local filtering, or parental supervision). I would certainly not use an ISP that uses this filter.

    Nevyn of Brisbane
    5:22pm today
    Labor was voted in on a policy of an optional filter for those who wanted it. The current proposal places Australia squareky with China and Iran in terms of Internet filtering. A secret blacklist compiled in secret with no public review or accountability. Couple this with Senator Conroy's misleading claims concerning filtering in other countires and this becomes a truely disturbing situation.

    Running scared of Canberra
    5:19pm today
    Making this a mandatory requirement for all net users is a bit too big brother, not that it would work. Jamie of Blue Mountains; you are correct sir! This system is clearly open to all sorts of abuse. Who is running this system? What is his/her agenda? Who is he/she working for? Censoring the net for minors is a good idea; however this ridiculous scheme should be on an opt-in basis. I will take my business away from any ISP that tries to force content filtering on me. Censoring what materials the kiddies can access is the responsibility of their parents. I will decide what is appropriate for my children to access and what is not. I will not leave this task to some public servant.

    wallace of melbourne
    4:35pm today
    Hey K-dud what about freedom of speech how can you ban adult material from adults,if your internet provider goes along with this crap ring them up and tell them your going to cancel and take your money some other place.This is not china

    Kato of Canberra
    4:35pm today
    This filtering scheme will never work and will just make our already slow internet links slower and more expensive. The onus for internet filtering should be on parents. The irony here is that the body that regulates domain names has repeatedly knocked back domain naming for adult content which would make this kind of scheme work with very little overhead.

    Brad Peterson
    4:13pm today
    Open letter to all ISPs: I will take my business to any ISP which rejects this rediculous scheme. Especially since even mandatory filters can be bypassed in about 30 seconds if you get a secure proxy overseas. This is simply a pointless waste of money which will NOT WORK.

    bj73 of Bondi Junction
    4:07pm today
    I find this whole thing a huge concern for freedom of speech as I don't believe this measure is being brought to protect children at all. I believe it is a thinly veiled attempt by special interest groups, i.e. religious who would like to be the mind police and stop you looking at anything they don't agree with. I would like to stop paedophiles but when the government doesn't keep them in gaol or supply money for policing this really is a waste of time. I would like to see the government help the school P&C's to educate parents about their children's computer use, i.e. put the computer where they can see what their child is doing. How about the laptops the Gov't. promised has filtering on that. Most households don't have children apparently. File sharing which is what these degenerates do won't be stopped by these filters. How about the government actually spends the money on resourcing the police to find these people and prosecute them. It doesn't go away if you pretend it isn't there. It is a known fact paedophiles cannot be rehabilitated.

    djc of sydney
    4:00pm today
    i can smell another Rudd government failure GroceryChoice - fail Petrol commissioner & Fuelwatch - fail Internet filtering - ???

    William of Sydney
    3:56pm today
    At least the Howard Government gave you the choice to install a web filter, with this current government they want to make the choice for you. This is just not on, we are not living in China, but in a free country where we decide what we want to see on the internet without 'Big Brother' deciding it for us. I regret voting for Kevin Rudd and I hope he is only a one-term PM, we don't need leaders that seek to limit our freedom of choice in this country!

    Jesse of Cairns
    3:39pm today
    Risky venture? This is political suicide. This is disgusting policy I would expect from a country like China, not Australia. They will get a big backlash from this, not just the government but ISPs too.

    Jamie of Blue Mountains
    3:20pm today
    Fair well freedom, that blacklist has a lot of anti-political websites on it as well.

    belveder
    3:18pm today
    How ridiculous, to filter what we do and where we go on the internet. Agreed the pornography is a problem, but to have control over everything else, watch people just give up on the internet and ISP's suffer or even close. Then the consequences of that to other business's. I have heard people say Australia is becoming a little China, I am starting to believe it

    Michael of Brisbane
    2:54pm today
    Here's an idea: scrap this stupid and poorly-conceived idea and spend the money on providing filtering software to parents that want it. Let the parents be parents and stop having the government treat everyone like children until the day they die. Vote this stupid Rudd govt out before he has the chance to implement this!

    Its Just My Opinion of Canberra
    2:46pm today
    Any content filtering MUST be voluntary. We do not live in China or North Korea. The government has no right to tell me what I can and cannot read on the internet. The money would be much better spent providing police with the appropraite resources to catch those viewing illegal material.

    Andre le Mancha of Sydney
    2:43pm today
    All ISP's should boycott the government’s ridiculous and unworkable plans. When the entire internet industry is against this, and refuses to have anything to do with it; maybe clueless Conroy will go home and stop trying to control the minds of ordinary Australian adults. Children, of course, should be protected by their parent or guardian by installing LOCAL filtering software on their PC, leaving censorship decisions to the parents, where it belongs.

    Megamanic of Perth
    2:26pm today
    What if you had a trial & nobody came? Seriously, what ISP in their right mind is going to want to participate? Despite the assurances, filtering will make you slower. Your customers will flock away to non-participating ISPs looking for things as prossaic as a decent ping time for World of Warcraft while those actually into bad stuff will continue to download unimpeded using technology that can't be logged or filtered using the techniques suggested.

  • #13
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    56
    Posts
    31,150
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 13,731 Times in 5,823 Posts
    Rep Power
    4552
    Reputation
    165805

    Default

    Ok , a couple of points from the Australian IT article :

    Quote Originally Posted by AustralianIt
    The mandatory portion will adhere to a blacklist of thousands of illegal web pages managed by ACMA and an optional clean feed of URLs that would automatically censor content, mostly adult material.
    Can anyone think of what " other " material might be censored ? I presume terror related sites might be one.


    Quote Originally Posted by AustralianIt
    Ms Ashelford pointed to technical weaknesses with the EOI, one example being that the live pilot would limit users to a maximum of 12Mbps.

    "Many users exceed 12Mbps right now. Some national broadband network proposals have involved technology that provides speeds up to 50Mbps.

    "How future-proof is the national broadband network supposed to be when filtering systems are virtually guaranteed to bottleneck the resulting network," she said.
    This is a big issue. If this is going to drag our speeds down to 12 Mbps , what is the point of building a high speed network ? This government has rocks in its head I think.

    One thing that I think we could do is to encourage customers of any ISP that signs up for the trial to churn and to notify the company that they are churning due to this filter being imposed on them and effecting their line speed.

  • #14
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    Technically, I can see how you could blacklist the IP address of a porn site but what about other protocols. I like many have a paid NNTP server account. That lets me download pretty much anything. Samething with Bit Torrent.

    Now let us say I want a copy of Lesbian Playtime 2008 I could simply search for and download it. The options the authorities have are to block all NNTP traffic and Bit Torrent or do actual content analysis. That could be as simple as name matching so Lesbian Playtime 2008 would be blocked. Let’s say some kind person renames the file to Playtime08 are they going to have armies of people trolling news groups for names to block. Lots of this stuff is split up in multiple RAR files to analyse the content would require downloading it un archiving it, analysing it before permitting it or not.

  • #15
    Super Moderator
    enf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    70
    Posts
    17,753
    Thanks
    16,820
    Thanked 34,964 Times in 9,060 Posts
    Rep Power
    13678
    Reputation
    644489

    Default

    I posted this in another forum, but it needs to be here.

    Here's a torrent of a radio interview with a representative of EFA if anyone is interested.



    I like the wisdom of Gore Vidal, as evidenced by the signature that I currently use. Heres a quote of his from 2001. It is from either a speech to the British Literary Society or an interview with German Magazine Der Speigel...not sure.

    "In the next few years, the empire is going to strike back at the Internet in the interest of protecting our children from porn, drugs and terrorism - all of which the U.S. government will claim is being peddled by the Internet. There is not a trick they won't pull to get control. After all, what better way to control everyone's mind, or at least the input of information?"

    Are Kevin Rudd and the rest really so blind?.....or perhaps trying to make us so.
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.

  • #16
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    104
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    198
    Reputation
    10

    Default

    Thought it might be time to put in my two cents, as I've heard rumblings on this issue a little as part of lobbying activities here in Canberra. I would certainly support EFA's no clean feed campaign, but it might be worth us taking a deep breath too.

    Firstly without the support of the Liberal Party in the Senate this will not fly. The Greens and Barnaby Joyce are against it entirely from what I understand. Steve Fielding wants the optional filtering to kick in at a lower level and Nick Xenophon is looking for overseas gaming sites to be blocked in cases where they would be illegal if hosted locally under current Australian laws. This is all probably fair enough.

    With regard to the effect of filtering on network performance and speeds, ACMA have finally got around to sticking THAT report on their website, you can get it here:

    To summarise - the report finds that of the six products tested, one (maybe two) would be suitable for HTTP-based filtering in the near term if they are improved further. They have a good hit rate for the Category 1 content (the illegal stuff currently on the ACMA blacklist) with one product only slowing speeds in the trial by 2%.

    None of the the six products tested could do anything about P2P communication other than block the ports entirely. Instant messaging and streaming media were also poor. How you are going to prevent kiddie fiddlers trading material in encrypted zip files with innocuous names "progress report Nov08.zip" or whatever will be interesting. Without, the filters are pretty much useless.

    Which comes to the crux of the issue. Everyone who is advocating mandatory ISP-based filters think that the web (HTTP traffic) is all there is. These other new fandangled things like BitTorrent are just there for people to circumvent copyright, yeah? Basically the Government is trying to pander to these people (Fielding and Xenophon in particular) in exchange for their support on other legislation.

    The flip side is that the department (DBCDE) is at a sensitive stage with institutional bidding for the National Broadband Network - and they don't want to scare bidders away with talk that the NBN will be speed throttled, or that people won't be allowed to use P2P. Piracy aside, bandwidth is big business for ISPs, and 60% of all net traffic in Australia is P2P. The Government still has a significant stake in Australia's largest ISP, Telstra BigPond, so there is a direct financial interest as well.

    There is also talk that Labor HQ might be playing the child pornography card in the debate because it's embarrassed over its own handling of cases in this area. In the last decade at least four Labor MPs and officials (Bill D’Arcy, Neville Hilton, Milton Orkopoulos and Keith Wright) have been convicted of child sex offences; Bob Collins had charges outstanding when he died.

    The likely wash-up? ISPs will be self regulated to implement the existing ACMA blacklist with fines if they get caught letting in prohibited content, but no one will really be checking. They will also be asked to implement server-side filtering of other content for parents who can't supervise their children, at extra cost of course.
    Last edited by martoanu; 12-11-08 at 07:51 PM. Reason: extra info re. trade

  • #17
    Senior Member
    intelliGEORGE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sydney, AUSTRALIA
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4,106
    Thanks
    884
    Thanked 1,484 Times in 691 Posts
    Rep Power
    478
    Reputation
    7236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LeroyPatrol View Post
    It's almost like we live in a communist society sometimes....

    Leroy
    That's democracy for you, instead of one wacko controlling your life, there are 226 of them!

  • #18
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    56
    Posts
    31,150
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 13,731 Times in 5,823 Posts
    Rep Power
    4552
    Reputation
    165805

    Default Some more - 10,000 sites maybe

    AUSTRALIA'S mandatory internet filter is being primed to block 10,000 websites as part of a blacklist of unspecified "unwanted content", Communications Minister Stephen Conroy revealed in Federal Parliament.
    The 10,000 blocked websites would include 1300 websites already blacklisted by the Australian Communications and Media Authority.

    Senator Conroy revealed details of the Rudd Government's proposed web filter as he called for expressions of interest from internet service providers for a live trial of the technology.

    As part of the trial, ISPs will test different methods of filtering the web with subscribers who volunteer. The trial is expected to last six weeks and will start before Christmas.

    "The pilot will specifically test filtering against the ACMA blacklist of prohibited content, which is mostly child pornography, as well as filtering of other unwanted content," Senator Conroy told Parliament.

    "While the ACMA blacklist is currently around 1300 URLs, the pilot will test against this list as well as filtering for a range of URLs to around 10,000 so that the impacts on network performance of a larger blacklist can be examined."

    ACMA's laboratory trial of web-filtering technology this year found filtering technology could slow internet access by as much as 87 per cent and by at least 2 per cent.

    Electronic Frontiers Australia board member Colin Jacobs says live trials of ISP-based web filters would be rushed, as they were scheduled to occur as internet companies geared down for Christmas.

    Mr Jacobs said large internet providers such as Telstra and Optus would find it difficult to participate, while mid-sized providers might take part in the trial simply to prove the technology "unfeasible".

    Mr Jacobs said the civil liberties group was also concerned at what would be deemed "unwanted content".

    "It is unclear how ACMA will scale up their blacklist to 10,000 websites and what will go on the list," he said.

    "Mr Conroy said the list would contain illegal and unwanted content but we still have to see what would end up on that list.

    "Under the current mandate that includes adult material, which would mean most material that could be rated R and, in some circumstances, material rated MA15+."

  • #19
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    56
    Posts
    31,150
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 13,731 Times in 5,823 Posts
    Rep Power
    4552
    Reputation
    165805

    Default




    Does anyone else see the resemblance between Senator Conroy and Lloyd Christmas ( Jim Carrey ) in Dumb and Dumber ". Its uncanny

    " Austria ? " " Gidday maate ! "

  • #20
    Senior Member
    iwacelect's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,581
    Thanks
    858
    Thanked 663 Times in 434 Posts
    Rep Power
    367
    Reputation
    4190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sanity View Post
    Does anyone else see the resemblance between Senator Conroy and Lloyd Christmas ( Jim Carrey ) in Dumb and Dumber ". Its uncanny

    " Austria ? " " Gidday maate ! "
    FUNNY sanity, but your right, if you squint a bit.....

    PS sent email, everyone should!
    Last edited by iwacelect; 14-11-08 at 11:16 AM. Reason: pix only needs one post (even if its funny as)
    When I explained to the guy what avatar I wanted, that wasn't what I meant!

  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •