I had the same thing happen to me on cnn.com. I posted a comment in reply to an article on ACTA. Basically I just recited some information I had heard on NPR earlier in the day. No profanity, flaming, trolling or anything of the sort.

The next day when I attempted to post I get a message "you have been banned from posting in forums". I finally found an e-mail address that was supposed to provide help with forums issue, but received no reply. My account was never locked out, as I can still log in, but still no posting in forums.

My opinion is that we're seeing a trend of websites banning people from forums to suit their own needs. Which is disturbing because what? We are supposed to only make comments that agree with the web site staff? That doesn't seem right.

I supose it's possible this was some type of technical error, and IT does not read the "help" inbox. Not that CNN actually cares, but I have dropped their feed, and now read Reuters for world news.

Not sure what your budget is, but you might look into Pano zero clients as a solution for general purpose business workstations. Basically you put up an esxi / vcenter server, and P to V your workstations from the hardware to the esxi server using VMWare Converter. Very easy process.

Then you deploy Pano "zero clients", which are little black boxes with no moving parts. You then fire up the Pano server VM. Pano distributes their server software in VM format. You simply use VMWare converter to add it to your esxi box. Then you run a simple web based setup on the Pano server. Finally you go into the Pano server and associate the Pano device with an AD account. Walla. That user logs into the Pano device assigned to them, and they get the correct workstation. If they want to go work at another desk, just assign them a different Pano device. Instant roaming profiles without all the hassle.

Pano also offers a dual monitor attachment. I have not tested this, so I can't say how well it works, but there is one available.

Some other benefits are that if the building power blips (assuming you do not have a backup generator for your entire building), the Pano devices connect right back up to esxi, and no work is lost (assuming you have adequate backup power in your server room). DR is also fairly easy. You just use VCDR or VCB (being phased out) to restore your workstations.

There is some minor power savings as well. The Pano uses only 2.5 watts, whild a Dell Optiplex GX520 uses 250 Watts. You have to factor in the power use of the server as well, so in some cases you might actually use more power in the zero client scenario, depending on how many VM Workstations you can cram onto your esxi boxes.

I worked on one of these Pano boxes at my desk for over a month with zero problems, but the sell to management failed mainly due to the cost of VCenter.

I buy used paperbacks at the local book store for $3.00 - $5.00. An e-book reader costs somewhere in the neighborhood of $300.00, and the Kindle books run $5 - $10.00 (or more) on Amazon. In my opinion, adding this much expense to reading is a perfect example of price gouging. I put price gougers in the same category as pirates.

I would also ask Mr. Frisch how he feels about libraries, used book stores, and people who give read books to family and freinds? My opinion is that all three of these practices are perfectly legal, and socially acceptable, yet no royalties are passed on to the author. Authors have never, and will never receive a royalty for each copy of their work. I would also guess that since digital books cannot be resold in used book stores, checked out from the library, or given to friends after reading (I'm assuming DRM attempts to prevent this), that authors would receive a higher percentage of royalties on digital books.

Based on the people I know who read, books are less of a target for piracy. I do not know one single person who reads on a regular basis, and also has the skill set or desire to pirate e-books.

Even if e-books are being pirated, shouldn't the blame rest squarely on the DRM? It's common knowledge that many types of encryption have been cracked, so only a fool would put trust in such a faulty mechanism, right? The commonly known reality is that any copyrighted electronic work stands a very high chance of being pirated, encryption or no, so why aren't the E-Book vendors held accountable for distributing copyrighted material with faulty copy protection?

I would have to agree with your post 100%. Microsoft and Google use their free products / services to generate advertising revenue, and consumer interest.

You've figured out what entertainment consumers in 2009 want.

"....people 'feel entitled' to have what they want when they want it..."

People want to easily and quickly download or stream entertainment without a bunch of licensing and proprietary format hassles.

Now get your lazy ass out of the $3,500.00 leather executive chair and go figure out some products that people want to buy.

Media distributors should not be asking "why are people copying media", or "how do we stop people from copying media", but "how can we make money from people copying media?" Making copies of music, movies, and books is human nature. It's a battle that cannot and will not be won.

It's been proven that consumers are less and less willing to support the exorbitant prices historically, and currently charged for music, movies, and books on physical media. Media distributors need to ask themselves how they will compel consumers to continue paying $25.00 for a HD version of a movie they've already seen? $15.00 for a new paperback that can be bought for $4.00 at a used book store, or read for free at a library? $15.00 for a CD contining music that's been played on the raido for 20 years? I'm a consumer, and my opinion is that the products are overpriced, not original (for the most part), and quite frankly something that can be had for free with very little effort.

What is compelling me to go purchase these products? Nothing at the moment.

Looks like we might need a new product called ABP Block Plus.

First of all, I would strongly disagree that most consumer software is currently 95%, more like 45% at best. I currently recommend people NOT use many of the consumer products with the highest market penetration, simply because it is nearly impossible to make them both safe and usable.

Second, we're paying far more than 4x for "good enough". Sure, the consumer goes and pays the "good enough" price, but that is FAR from the end of it. Consumers spend hundreds of billions every year fixing and securing "good enough".

Third, there are many more people affected than "consumers". All other markets including commercial, and government are affected. Corporations have to pay millions for AV, IDS, encryption, firewall, backup / recovery, and other related products because the core products are "good enough".

I would say the world has had it's fill of "good enough".

but how many games actually compel players to create enjoyable stories? Most games I've played are not good vehicles for storytelling because the players are compelled to focus on game mechanics. If you want a good story, read a book.

Ok my opinion is that it's silly to award damages on a word that has taken more than one meaning in popular culture. Obviously I'm not *that* clueless because the ruling in this case agrees with my original post. Furthermore, how does the current administrative staff of Slashdot have *anything* to do with any of this? If you have a beef with Slashdot, take it up with them, not me.