#Toni

No oxymoron at all. Your name or address is not published and your anonymous post is published.

To what end do I leave expressions of Jew-hatred - not merely personal denigration of abuse of myself - online? If I were to have these defamatory posts deleted by Graham then the Jew-hatred portions would also be deleted.

I can cop the personal abuse and prefer decent minded people to actually read and understand the Jew-hatred rife in the community that expresses itself anonymously without end with the object of denigrating Jews and their Jewish State.

The world managed without the Internet for centuries.

You state:" The internet is the natural habitat of the troll, and if they're eradicated it will upset the delicate balance of the ecosystem."

When your house is being invaded by white ants - you call in the pest exterminator.

That internet ecosystem sure needs a clean out. The Security Council seems to be coming slowly to the same conclusion.

Would you object if the following condition of publication was imposed by all web sites:

"We unfortunately receive abusive, offensive and racist messages on a routine basis. We want it to be clear that we reserve the right to reject them in our absolute discretion. Hate sites abound on the web. So not being allowed to play in our sandbox can hardly be called a hardship. Anonymous postings or messages where email address of the poster is hidden from us will generally not be accepted."

You're a sneaky bugger David,
Rather than say you want to impose these new regulations on the forum members speech which they would almost certainly object to, you put forward a question that 99% of people would not object to, thereby creating a consensus on the issue.
Once you have that consensus all you have to do is take steps to put forward an agreed method for which to police such behavior.

Boy, you must really think people are dumb.

The problem with all of this, is that you haven't proven in any way that anyone has broken the law in regards to the limits on their speech.
All you have done is made claims, as you always do, and none of your claims ever actually stands up.

You haven't proven beyond any level of doubt that anyone's comment is unreasonable or having no basis or that they are genuinely put forward in a hateful or inciteful manner, and it also seems as though you have not contacted the forum administrator to discuss your concerns.

Show me the posts where you claim that my comments are NOT genuine criticism (that I usually back up with references), and where I have shown open hatred for Jews and Israelis or where I have made a comment that condoned or incited violence against them.

Show me this racist and inciteful hate speech David??
Please list the comments that fall into this very specific category.

And then list all the ones you object to and you seek to regulate the speech of Australians simply because you don't like them.

If you can't list the actual comments that are deliberately hateful towards Jews, then its reasonable for members of this forum to suspect that your intention is to subvert with propaganda and regulate the behavior of Australians in regards to support of a foreign nations agenda.

I'm allowed to criticise that's part of accepted speech.
It's no-one else's fault if you get offended by accepted speech.

Dear Critic,

<<The problem with all of this, is that you haven't proven in any way that anyone has broken the law in regards to the limits on their speech.>>

I think that you missed the point: the laws of this place are those set by our sovereign leader, Graham Young and he is the only one to determine the limits of our speech. It seems that David is unwilling to accept this and would rather want to enforce on us the laws of the Canberra regime, if not even the "international law" of the United-Nations and its "security-council".

Had it been Graham who issued the "We unfortunately receive abusive..." notice at his own initiative, then surely I would abide, but what David is trying to do here is to override Graham's decisions by the coercive violence of the Canberra regime and the security-council. This we should not accept.

#Armchair critic

I repeat my request that you have so far refused to comply with:

"If you had the guts to post your real name and address I would be more than happy to forward your comments to the Race Discrimination Commissioner to investigate and also to the police to consider action against you under the Crimes Act Amendment (Incitement to violence) Bill 2005.

Name and address please.."

Why are you so scared of your comments being examined by the authorities set up to deal with complaints of racism and incitement to violence under the laws of this country?

Given your own opinion that you have done nothing wrong - I would have thought you would jump at the opportunity to vindicate your comments.

Interesting also to note that you think 99% of the public would agree with my suggested statement of policy on publication of comments.

#Yuyutsu

Glad to see you would also have no objection to Graham stipulating the policy guidelines on publication of comments as suggested by me.

Over to you Graham for your consideration and comments.

//I can cop the personal abuse and prefer decent minded people to actually read and understand the Jew-hatred rife in the community that expresses itself anonymously without end with the object of denigrating Jews and their Jewish State.//

Oh. So you're trying to prove there are anti-semitic turds on the internet. Once again: we know, dude. What's with this obsession with demonstrating the bloody obvious?

//The world managed without the Internet for centuries.//

Wow, great argument Dave (sarcasm). We also managed for centuries without electricity or refrigerators or antibiotics. Should we just wind the clock back on all of those because we don't really need them either?

We have lived without the internet and can do so again, but why would we want to? Just because life is possible with the absence of x, it does not follow that life is not vastly improved by the presence of x.

However, I'm sure you managed without the internet for decades and that there is nothing preventing you from doing so again. If you don't like the internet and it isn't necessary, why do you bother with it? There are lots of good books to read which are completely free of anti-semitism. Or maybe you could learn to play an instrument or something.

//When your house is being invaded by white ants - you call in the pest exterminator.//

Well that is a very interesting choice of analogy, Dave. Are you aware that termites are classified as type of cockroach? Now, where else have I seen analogies comparing people to cockroaches? Oh yeah, it was here:

http://antisemitism.org.il/article/103506/article-referred-concentration-camp-inmates-cockroaches

and here

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/the-uns-statement-on-katie-hopkins-cockroaches-column-about-immigrations-full-text-10202351.html

Nice one, Dave.

The internet is not my house, Dave. It's not your house either. It's everybody's house and they've as much right to be there as you. But the nice thing about it is that it's a really big house, so if you find the jerks in one room too unpleasant, you can go to a different room where you don't have to listen to them.

Now, you might be tempted to argue 'couldn't we just evict the jerks so I don't have to change rooms?' but the problem with that is defining who the jerks are: there's probably somebody who thinks you're a jerk, so we'd have to evict you too. In fact, if we evict everybody that somebody thinks is a jerk then we'll have no humans left at all using the internet, which is probably when Skynet will take over.

//That internet ecosystem sure needs a clean out.//

Of species that are nearly as old as the internet itself, that have grown and involved with their natural environs over time, that thrive and multiply here? Or of invasive pest species that want to radically alter their environment to suit their needs instead of adapting to it, despite the effects this will have on the thriving and vibrant ecosystem which already exists? Because I have to say I'm with the trolls on this one.

They've been here longer than you and are more at home here. And then you sweep in and demand that the existing environment be razed because you think it's messy and you'd prefer a nice park with proper topiary and cute red squirrels and ducks, not just a bunch of flora and fauna scattered haphazardly about the place. Why should the Internet revolve around you, Dave? And why sweep in in the first place?