You guess wrong. If I was the AC, I would either have continued posting AC or not posted AC at all.
I happen to agree strongly with the AC who posted. Saying "burn down the entire fucking BT HQ" because of a story that does not even affect you (Yeah, that's right, iPlayer is not even available outside the UK) is for fucknuts.

Any "idiot" who has ever used the word fuck usually does not say something along the lines of "I want to fuck your sister in the ass. Paying for bandwidth I can't use pisses me off" and then claim to have not actually meant anything to do with your sister.

Anyways, I'm bored with this shit.

I guess that explains your poor grasp of some basic english words then. Words such as "entire".

30% of a comment does not constitute the whole or total.
You also mention that some of your words are irrelevant and say that I am off topic.

In case you did not notice, the topic at hand in this little thread is your post about burning down a building and then your claims of being misunderstood and slamming an AC when they disagree with you. If you can't defend your posts against contradictory viewpoints without complaining that people are off topic or ignorant, then blogging might suit you better than forums.

I use entanet and I'm pretty impressed by their stance on certain issues.
Their CTO on iplayer
Enta against Phorm

They work through resellers like Aquiss, ADSL24, UKFSN, Freeola, Seriously, Vivaciti and others. They sell plans by the peak allowance amount, with massive limits during off-peak and don't try to limit what software or protocols you use.

The comment about not being able to use the service you paid for made up less than one third of your post and you did in fact say that the building should be burnt down because they had pissed you off.
If you feel that you have been misunderstood and did not intend for arson to be your main point, perhaps you should consult a doctor about Alien Hand Syndrome

P.S. Despite the criminal charge of incitement having been aboloshed in the UK last year, it was replaced with 3 new offences of encouraging or assisting. Would it not have been wise to use the AC tag yourself?

Wrong. This is not being looked at because google are a brilliant company who love everybody, this is being looked at because the deal is f'king shady.

The authors guild wants to sell monopoly rights to google. Rights which are not theirs to sell, if they even exist at all.
The exclusive right to scan and sell any orphaned book, which might very well contradict copyright laws.
The exclusive right to decide what constitutes an "out of print" work, and republish it.
There are others, those are just the two I can recall off the top of my head.

Google would be released from the legal obligation to seek permission of copyright holders first, whether the holders are members of the authors guild or not. As you can probably imagine, there's no way in hell the authors guild has the legal capacity to grant that permission for all authors (including foreign authors).

So google and the authors guild are trying to create an illegal monopoly.

Not just keyboards.

From http://fsfe.org/projects/wipo/fser.en.html

So, on the one hand they are trying to say "there is no difference between free software and open source", and on the other they are pointing out that open source does not always mean the same thing as free software.

If they cannot even unify what they are saying with what they have said, what hope is there for them to unify developers?

Trade secrets should cover that.

With the DOJ and possibly the EU looking into googles book settlement for antitrust reasons, consumers will not be better off if the settlement is allowed to stand. They never are when dealing with a monopoly.

If google enters the market as a fair competitor to amazon, then sure, it should lead to lower prices and more choice, but I don't think google is even remotely interested in fair competition.

If an article is protected, you can still go edit some other article. It doesn't stop the whole thing being editable.
If you've gotten yourself banned for something you did in your edits, then you already had your chance at editing.

Maybe if the hook was "The encyclopedia anyone can continue to edit, forever".

Psychosomatic heart disease in american civil war soldiers? Preposterous!
Post traumatic stress in the 1800's? Not on your nelly!

Your statement that people suffering from PTSD should die however does have some historical precident. You'd have been great at executing "cowards" and "traitors"
I would work on your idea of modern though.

Which european countries would this be?
From personal experience, it can't be the UK.

The bad news is that we can't remove your brain tumor.
The absolutely brilliant news is that we've withdrawn the diagnosis. Officially, you have no tumor. Now quit whining and get on with life.

A pill to cure cynicism will cause people to misquote? That is a bad idea!

Cruelty is not something most people have no experience with, it's part of growing up.
You got bullied for wearing glasses, I got crap for having hearing aids, other kids I knew got it because they were fat while others were bullied for being skinny, some were too short, some too tall, some too rich, some too poor, some had permanent snotty noses, one kid got it because his dad was a policeman. It happens to everyone.

The things you've listed as having lost all or part of are lacking in most adults.
Smiling all the time and announcing "Hey, it's tuesday, let's all go to the beach" do not really work beyond the age of puberty.