# Prior restraint and breaking the law **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [January 24, 2018, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335 "2018-01-24T01:37:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2018, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/21 "2018-01-24T20:59:58Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Right. Problems could often be avoided by trying to employ some common sense in understanding why a rule is there, rather than trying to interpret it according to its strictest sense. The problem with relying on common sense is that no one completely agrees on what it is. So I’ll state it outright: We don’t want the board to be sued. If someone sees that advice and follows it, and bad things happen to them, they may try to blame the board. Whether illegal or not, this is a horrible idea with horrible consequences if you get caught. Anyways, I think that claims such as “This is almost certainly highly illegal” are going to always get more pushback than something less certain, like “This is getting too close to promoting illegal activity, and may even cross the line.” (Though I do like the additional “and could get them into big trouble,” as that is nearly the real point.) But that’s just my common sense, based on noticing Internet arguments. Maybe I’m wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2018, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/22 "2018-01-24T21:19:14Z")
> [@sbunny8](#): > > However, I can recall many times in the past when I saw other posts encouraging activity that is unquestionably illegal and I didn’t see any warnings issued there. For example, we’ve had more than one thread discussing whether it’s safer to break the speed limit when most of the other traffic is speeding. Speeding isn’t generally a crime (misdemeanor or felony, can carry prison or jail time), it’s an infraction (fine and possible loss of license). I don’t really find it surprising that the moderators don’t care about people discussing activity that is technically illegal but not actually criminal. And I don’t find it surprising that they don’t add an exception to the rule specifically for this because it’s useless to do so and only serves to encourage rule lawyers. > [@](#): > > I don’t want to sound like a whiner here. I’m just saying that it’s easy to forget that this rule exists, given the many times it went unenforced in the past. Should we interpret this to be a shift in policy, that the rule will be taken more seriously starting now? Or is it just that the level of enforcement is proportional to the seriousness of the crime being discussed? I think the safest interpretation is that moderators are humans with human-level intelligence enforcing the rules as needed to fit their real agenda of keeping discussion within the bounds of what the board owners want. And if you really forget that the rule exists, you’re just going to get a mod note or at worst a warning to remind you, it’s not like it costs you money or makes you lose your job. ---
**Author:** ![BlankSlate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blankslate/32/80_2.png) [@BlankSlate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlankSlate)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2018, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/23 "2018-01-24T21:25:49Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > I sometimes wish that moderator whims would include handing out notes to people who abuse ellipses. Also, **Colibri** should whack his own wrist with a ruler for suggesting that something was “highly” illegal. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2018, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/24 "2018-01-24T23:58:10Z")
Maybe what i necessary is for the registratin agreement to be rewritten to be less vague. \* You agree not to post material that in our opinion encourages activity that is illegal in the U.S. \* How can a poster agree to not post such material, when there is no way of knowing what “our opinion” is? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/25 "2018-01-25T00:06:23Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Maybe what i necessary is for the registratin agreement to be rewritten to be less vague. > \* > You agree not to post material that in our opinion encourages activity that is illegal in the U.S. \* > > How can a poster agree to not post such material, when there is no way of knowing what “our opinion” is? As has been pointed out before, when you draw clear lines, people tend to line dance. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/26 "2018-01-25T00:54:31Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Maybe what i necessary is for the registratin agreement to be rewritten to be less vague. If they start rewriting the registration agreement to address every ill-founded complaint about the exact wording, it will never cease changing because certain people just like to argue about wording. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/27 "2018-01-25T01:58:15Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Maybe what i necessary is for the registratin agreement to be rewritten to be less vague. > \* > You agree not to post material that in our opinion encourages activity that is illegal in the U.S. \* > > How can a poster agree to not post such material, when there is no way of knowing what “our opinion” is? So you are saying you accepted the registration agreement when you didn’t believe you could possibly fulfill its terms?😉 As already pointed out, this is a free anonymous message board, not a court of law. Were not going to rewrite the registration agreement so it stands up under Supreme Court scrutiny. We’ll all just have to muddle along somehow as we have for the past 19 years. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/28 "2018-01-25T03:20:27Z")
My objection to the wording of the clause in the agreement has nothing to do with its intent, which is laudable. It has to do with the impossible burden that it imposes on any user who is not a mind-reader. Which does have relevance, since, as you correctly say, the user registration agreement is a legal contract, enforceable by law. Having said that, no doubt your attorneys consider the language to be boilerplate and therefore easy to defend. And the only reason it is there is to make any arising litigation defensible. Look, he violated the agreement, and we made a reasonable effort to insulate ourselves from culpability. You covered your ass. I withdraw my objection. By the way, I am in no way criticizing anything any moderator has ever done in attempting to enforce this provision, or any other. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/29 "2018-01-25T03:48:36Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Having said that, no doubt your attorneys consider the language to be boilerplate and therefore easy to defend. And the only reason it is there is to make any arising litigation defensible. The user agreement literally says that users can be banned for no reason whatsoever. Any other guidance about how to avoid getting banned is really just courtesy on their part. > [@](#): > > Please remember that you are our guest here, and that we reserve the right to exclude you at our whim, for any or no reason whatsoever. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/30 "2018-01-25T05:03:28Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > The user agreement literally says that users can be banned for no reason whatsoever. Any other guidance about how to avoid getting banned is really just courtesy on their part. - Please remember that you are our guest here, and that we reserve the right to exclude you at our whim, for any or no reason whatsoever. \* I wonder if that disclaimer immunizes them to exclude members of a protected class, which would fall in the category of “any . . reason whatsoever”. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/31 "2018-01-25T05:31:11Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > - > > Please remember that you are our guest here, and that we reserve the right to exclude you at our whim, for any or no reason whatsoever. \* > > I wonder if that disclaimer immunizes them to exclude members of a protected class, which would fall in the category of “any . . reason whatsoever”. I checked and I can’t find the part that says “…even if it against the law.”, so I’m guessing…no. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/32 "2018-01-25T07:53:52Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > I wonder if that disclaimer immunizes them to exclude members of a protected class, which would fall in the category of “any . . reason whatsoever”. Is there even such a thing as a “protected class” for message board membership? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/33 "2018-01-25T14:24:25Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > So you are saying you accepted the registration agreement when you didn’t believe you could possibly fulfill its terms?😉 YOU mods have made it impossible by taking the stand of “We’re not lawyers so we don’t know every law. We thought it was a discussion of an illegal act.” So now, I talk about how I want to how I want to trap a fox and eat it. Completely legal but the mods THINK it’s illegal to trap a fox. Viola I have now broken the registration agreement. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/34 "2018-01-25T15:10:24Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > YOU mods have made it impossible by taking the stand of “We’re not lawyers so we don’t know every law. We thought it was a discussion of an illegal act.” It has always been this way as far as I know, so how could they have _made_ it impossible? edited to add: And once again, the Mods aren’t the ones making these decisions-Why do you blame them? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/35 "2018-01-25T15:36:27Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > Is there even such a thing as a “protected class” for message board membership? It’s theoretically possible for the SDMB to fall within the ambit of certain states’ anti-discrimination laws. However, since the SDMB only operates online, federal law effectively makes it exempt from any such state laws. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/36 "2018-01-25T15:49:56Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It has always been this way as far as I know, so how could they have _made_ it impossible? > edited to add: And once again, the Mods aren’t the ones making these decisions-Why do you blame them? This^ Blaming the mods for being proactive is wrong. They are doing exactly what the board wants. That is, preventing problems that end up upstairs in a boardroom full of frowning faces ready to pull the power cord on the server. So sign up to be a mod, that way, no matter what you do, someone won’t be happy, someone else will be pissed and yet another will tell you how much you suck as a mod. Wonderful job. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/37 "2018-01-25T16:09:53Z")
This feels like a lot of whining over nothing. In this case, it seems obvious the advice on the thread is intended to play rules lawyer with the law. “You’re not _really_ violating the law, just the intent.” And all they received was a Mod note, not even a Warning. How do you know what the mods think is violating the law? You don’t, really. But they hand out notes unless it’s really egregious, and then it’s just a Warning. And you are allowed to defend your post - in ATMB if not the thread itself. There is no policy change here, or change in enforcement. This is a one-time mod note in one thread to keep it on track. Why does every mod note lead to "OH NO, THE MODS ARE OUT TO GET US ALL! "? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/38 "2018-01-25T16:19:24Z")
IMHO the problem is that the system is set up where people who self-admittedly are not experts on the law have to decide if something described is illegal AND holds the poster responsible if the mod is wrong because in their opinion (but remember they’re not experts) they had a feeling it was illegal. So I can post about a topic that is perfectly legal yet someone who doesn’t know the law but has an opinion on it can decide that it is illegal. Let’s look at it this way. Suppose the rule were “Posting what is in our opinion incorrect information in a GQ thread is a violation of the registration agreement.” You post, “In physics mass and energy are equivalent.” I’m am mod and not an expert in physics so in my opinion you are wrong. You are now in violation of the registration agreement. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/39 "2018-01-25T16:25:12Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > IMHO the problem is that the system is set up where people who self-admittedly are not experts on the law have to decide if something described is illegal AND holds the poster responsible if the mod is wrong because in their opinion (but remember they’re not experts) they had a feeling it was illegal. So I can post about a topic that is perfectly legal yet someone who doesn’t know the law but has an opinion on it can decide that it is illegal. > > Let’s look at it this way. Suppose the rule were “Posting what is in our opinion incorrect information in a GQ thread is a violation of the registration agreement.” You post, “In physics mass and energy are equivalent.” I’m am mod and not an expert in physics so in my opinion you are wrong. You are now in violation of the registration agreement. It seems that your examples rely on rules and decisions that haven’t been made on this board. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335/40 "2018-01-25T16:34:56Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > … > > Let’s look at it this way. Suppose the rule were “Posting what is in our opinion incorrect information in a GQ thread is a violation of the registration agreement.” You post, “In physics mass and energy are equivalent.” I’m am mod and not an expert in physics so in my opinion you are wrong. You are now in violation of the registration agreement. Would you be happier if the board paid to send all the mods to law school? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prior-restraint-and-breaking-the-law/807335.md?page=3)