Bonus points for homophobia, linking to the Daily Mail, and the phrase "politically correct".

Things white people like: white comic book super heroes.

To say he was the first to discover the Americas, means we end up assuming he was a better sailor than all those who came before him. And that feeds into the heroic image many people have of him now (which I think a lot of people have issue with - once they learn the facts).

To turn Columbus into a hero is inherently racist. And by talking about the positive things Columbus did (and to embellish them), and ignore the rest of what he did is turning him into a hero.

I should have been clearer: Columbus never set foot on any land which is now nor has ever been a part of the US. Maybe the mock Facebook page should have started at the Declaration of Independence or ratification of the Constitution.

He wasn't the first European to arrive at the Americas. There were several before him.

He certainly popularised the area - he was an innovator in the exploitation of land and peoples, which people for centuries to come imitated:

Columbus never landed on US soil - I even knew that before I read a single book on US history. I won't bother reading TFA since it's obviously a load of crap.

I think somebody's missed the joke. 30 times.

Just followed the link and clicked "Report Page". You have a right to your opinions, but if you will go ahead and get people with opposing viewpoints' Facebook pages deleted, then I'm very glad yours got deleted too. I'm only disappointed a) nobody else got theirs back and b) you got yours back.

There are obvious reasons why there are federal age requirements for Internet use: sexual predators, cyberbullying, adult content and explicit language.

Those are the obvious reasons. But none of those are correct.

[U.S. Congress] wanted to make certain that corporations could not collect or sell data about children under the age of 13 without parental permission, so they created a requirement to check age and get parental permission for those under 13. Most companies took one look at COPPA and decided that the process of getting parental consent was far too onerous so they simply required all participants to be at least 13 years of age.

http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2010/06/10/how-coppa-fails-parents-educators-youth.html

Viewing images accidentally is legal. But if you were told such-and-such URL contained illegal content, and you went there with the intention of reporting it, you have broken the law.

Instead of buying or renting a server farm (or using cloud-computing services), why not buy a botnet or build your own?

I'm going to sue!

But seriously, if we combine this with that recent request for help from the fellow whose name brings up a paedophile ... surely we can sue for defamation of character whether the comments are referring to ourselves or not? That would be my logical conclusion without reading TFA.

What? So you go on assuming everybody's straight?

One thing I noticed when looking at the Virgin Killers page while it was being blocked was that it pretended to be a 404 error (a very unconvincing one). This is presumably part of their "don't alert people" ploy too, but it confounds the majority of people from being able to discover that it's being blocked.

I regularly use software with EULAs to which somebody else has agreed.

Does that mean I would be eligable to sue the company for something which the EULA-clicker supposedly no longer has the right to do?

And does it make a difference as to who owns the hardware? (i.e. sysadmin agreeing on a university computer, compared to a cat agreeing to something running on my hardware).