What follows has been posted in various other threads and has been repeated in IRC - but I thought it was probably an OK idea to post it all together in one place if only so I could point them to it - anyway:
As far as we have been able to work out someone has informed and organisation in the UK called the Internet Watch Foundation http://www.iwf.org.uk/ of our little place on the net and they have deemed it to be unacceptable due to either race hate OR childporn... probably both. They have place ONE SPECIFIC URL on a block list.
Seemingly NTL and BT subscribe to this block list to different degrees (although oddly some people are still getting through from at least NTL not sure about BT). The URL they are blocking is the main /b/ http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html one which is why you are seeing a 404/403 on that one, but are still capable of seeing links within /b/.
There are quite a few ways to get around this, the two that I employ when Im on my work BT line is by using the IP address of the of the /b/ server, so then the URL would be: http://66.207.165.178/b/imgboard.html - this also works for NTL users. NTL users can also just add a '?' mark to the end of the normal URL to get around it thus: http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html?
You can also use proxies and tunnelling an other crap, such as http//securebar.secure/...
or installing your own copy of squid maybe.
BT users only are currently finding them selves banned completely from the img.4chan servers, I have no idea what that is about as I dont think anyones said.
Are BT/NTL logging failed connects to the boards? No idea. How long is this gonna last? No idea. Is there anyway to ge the block lifted? Having read the IWFs complaints procedure... only if you want the police at your door if its still found to be CPy.
I think thats it, be brave /b/tards. You can get through this.
D.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-15 19:07
As I mentioned in an earlier post - don't bother using secure-tunnel, as some CP poster has got that one banned until the 28th of June, so the rest of us can't use it (thanks pedo).
As for the reason for the ban, I did some digging and basically it's boiled down to CP, as racism is only bannable for a UK-based site.
It seems that different parts of the country have different levels of ban, or even none at all - as BT/NTL don't seem to have an organised strategy for blocking at the moment.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-15 22:31
i was never aware i lived in such a police state before ;/
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-15 22:54
>>3
I wonder how it's possible not to notice? Ever been watching news? UK has been hellhole police state for years and it has been just getting worse each year. Not limited to internet.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-15 23:14
>>4
i dont watch tv, all the news i read i get from links sent by friends/on message boards
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-16 8:09
Change your http proxy to webcache.bt.net:8080
This webcache doesn't use the same settings as the default webcaches, it is not banned from img and /b/ is not blocked. Also, it makes rapidshare slightly more usable; it still thinks you're about a thousand different people, but it does allow you to download, which the default proxies do not.
Is this related to how BT is banned from all of img?
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-16 15:02
I'm pretty certain moot got pissed with being declared a source of cp, and banned those ISPs as a means to have as many people as possible bitch until the block on /b/ was revoked.
So, do your part, don't just use this proxy; bitch at your ISP as well.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-16 15:24
>>10
Word from people who have called their ISPs regarding the blocks (not the 4chan banning, thats something different and only to do with BT users) have been told its nothing to do with them and is to do with UK Trading Standards - basically the Internet Watch Foundation...
The other main reason that people may not wanna push it too much is because you're basically arguing your right to view CP (in the ISPs eyes) - the fact that its a 'random' image board is lost.
The last thing I read about the BT 4chan ban was that it may be a cache somewhere thats redirecting to the ban page... makes vague sense - no idea whose problem it is though. Use the fix >>6 mentioned an its all fine.
freedom of speech is dead.
would using that TOR shit that all the pedos were using allow me to connect to 4chan?
i'm kinda bored of not being able to post on the banned boards.
I'm using BT, but thanks to this, i'm switching ISP as soon as i can.
Thanks for the info - so BT are being even shittier than we thought, and have now blocked /b/, /r/, /s/ and /t/. Wow.
Name:
Reddy2006-06-17 6:24
I'm with BT and get the banned message when i try and get on /s/, when i tried to get on /b/ it just said forbidden.
I guess it must be BT faggetry, or a mod who snapped or somethnig with rando-bans.
So 4chan screwing us brits from the other side to?.
Jesus christ, cant believe some over-sensitive peice of horse shit is so whingey they can ruin it for tons of folk who dont even know them and want nothing to do with them.
Surely thats the greatest curse on modern PC thuggery society, even the most distant un-known stranger with sensitivity issue's can fuck things up for tons of complete strangers who dont know them and have no interest in them.
"If your ISP is BT Internet, it appears that they are categorically redirecting you to this page. For the time being we are unable to do anything about this. You may want to contact them for further questions."
I call bullshit. Connecting to img.4chan.org and issuing a request for /b/ returns exactly the same response as if we are really banned - same server version + extensions, same redirect code .. everything!
I doubt BT would go to such lengths to redirect to a ban page in EXACTLY THE SAME WAY, so it seems to me that this is something the mods are doing just to piss us off.
You're doing it wrong - you need to compare the ban redirect
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-18 18:13
>>6
You sir, recieve great thanks. I've been suffering from a lack of /b/ under BT's oppression, and you have solved my problems. And Rapidshare now works for me too!
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-18 21:12
If we have the UK thinking that 4chan is a haven for CP, should we be worried in the USA? Call me paranoid, but I don't wanna get caught in a CP dragnet.
Yeah. You did. In light of your failure, you should TEACH ME THE WAYS OF QUOTING!
Name:
Shirox2006-06-19 4:26 (sage)
I'm not suprised something like this happened to /b/, with all the damn reposters causing a havok.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-19 11:17
u all failed
lol
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-19 15:55
FUCK YOU, 4CHAN, FOR BANNING US FROM IMG.4CHAN.ORG AND BLAMING IT ON BT
**FUCK YOU**
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-19 17:14
>>25
The IWF say that they find out where TEH EVIL CP SITE is hosted then send email to appropriate anti-CP organisations in that country. Given that /b/ has not shut down, whoever those organisations were obviously shook their heads sadly at IWF's complete failure to understand what a moderated anonymous imageboard is then ignored them.
So no, I wouldn't worry.
As a British Anonymous, I grow more depressed for the shitty state of my country every day. Our government is in many ways worse than the Bush administration when it comes to removing our basic civil liberties every chance it gets. The IWF is supposedly an independent "industry body" but in reality has close ties to the state through police partnership and the government's control and monitoring of ISPs (data retention article etc.) Today they block /b/, tommorow they could block legitimate political dissidents and whistleblowers because they're "terrorists" and "threats to national security". Or whatever the hell else they feel like.
I phoned up NTL and spent 4 hours on the phone with the head manager of our local telecommunications department, explaining that I'd make a huge deal about it and take it to the media, which is the one thing they actually fear.
I also explained to him just what 4Chan was and I explained just how many people go there. The guy (who I can't name for legal reasons) was flabbergasted as I explained who the minority were.
In my local area, 4Chan is now available and for those of you DN37, you can see me sporting a shirt that says "This man is your friend: He fights for /b/".
I'm using NTL, I can get into /b/ just fine without fucking with the URL or anything. Either they removed the block after realising it wasn't actually what IWF said it was, or the site-blocking is as half-arsed as the rest of their operation.
Name:
462006-06-22 11:34
oh! for some reason >>41 didn't show up, must have been an old cache. thank you, sir.
Name:
2006-06-22 13:52(capped)
How should I go about addressing this? Neither BT nor NTL have contacted me :(
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 17:45
They won't - they're just members of the IWF and as members agree to abide by it's decisions. The IWF won't contact you because they don't have to. You can't even find out 'officially' if you're on their shitlist unless you pay for membership - which costs thousands of $ and which they won't give you because you're on their shitlist.... It's not a pretty picture is it?
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 18:23
Options I suppose would be:
1. Go to IWF and demand a reassessment.
IWF may agree or not - if yes, no guarantee that their
faceless and nameless 'analyst' will arrive at a different
opinion. If no, end of that avenue officially speaking.
If yes and reassessment is positive then big win.
So that's a 1 in 3 chance of getting it fixed.
2. Get enough /b/ tards to complain to BT and NTL that the
ISPs either revoke their agreement to ban, or force a
reassessment themselves from the IWF (with, presumably, a
much higher chance of success than one originating from
yourself). So that's maybe a 1 in 2 or better chance of
success - BUT getting anyone to complain to a semi-official
body about an alleged CP site is going to be, at best,
pretty difficult. People are SCARED of any association
with CP and not many will stick their necks out.
3. The press. Well, do you feel lucky?
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 20:47
hmm... my girlfrend had this problem when browsing /b/. I checked some urls, and remembered that multiple slashes often get ignored but work ok in urls - so http://img.4chan.org//b/imgboard.html works fine :)
(I remembered this after some controversy many years ago about IE4 (I think) automatically removing double slashes and geeks complaining that it shouldn't)
Gives me a banned image. Really don't know if I'm banned from img or if this is another BT plot to redirect everyone to the banned page. Heard rumours somewhere BT was behind this too, and not 4chan.
Moot replied to me asking the same question, any folks with BT and NTL try and find a number or something for him? lets help out our glorious leader keep the regime going, ive had a look but i hate companies that make themselves hard to get hold of.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-24 7:01
BT(yahoo) is stupid to get hold of, even when you do they wont talk about any thing unless you have an account with them.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-24 11:15
Yeah, but whoever said that people are scared ob being associated with pedophilia here are right, doesnt matter if its true or false accusation, in britain if your taitned with pedophilia, rightly or wrongly, you can expect a witch-hunting mob outside your door.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-24 13:49
well i'm here saying the ip & port workaround thats stated to work for BT works for NTL as well, thanks for having this, if not particularly visible.
>>55
Whenever i try to call BT (or when they call me) im always re-directed to their call centre in India or somewhere, and they rarely understand what your saying.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-25 16:53
>>56
In Britain people are paranoid and scared of everything. That's why they live in police state. Oh well, their country seems to be dying anyway. Long lost are days of glory for British and their currently non-existand Empire. Good riddance.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-25 21:31
A. stop posting CP
B. Stop banning tor and proxy users from VIEWING 4chan
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-26 10:09
>> 61
I agree with both those points
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-26 12:25
>>62
I disagree with the second. The first too, when I think about it.
Correct it doesn't, #58 posted actual email addresses to try, but I doubt you'd get a worthwhile response. However it does show the hoops you have to jump through to get a site unblocked.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-27 17:20
Update - it seems that the UK ISP 'UK-Online' has implemented a block on /b/ as well - presumably this means they are also paid-up members of the IWF. Meh. This is getting silly.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-27 21:22
So are any admins trying to get this lifted?
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-28 6:37
Perhaps the best solution is to
1) Inform other Internet users of this problem
2) Boycott any provider who is a member of the 'Internet Watch Foundation' until they lift the ban (keeping customers is more important than being moral)
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-28 8:40
one final point for the solution:
Posts like 60 should shut up and keep their politics/race hate to themselves.
Name:
Heynonnymous2006-06-28 9:33
Just a reminder to those on BT finding themselves redirected to the "Banned" screen even while playing with the URL, you can use a different BT proxy to get around it, as #6 in this thread said.
Just change your http proxy to webcache.bt.net 8080.
Problem is they don't *want* to keep us. People who use /b/ are the type of people who use loads of bittorrent, and download 150GB a month. We're the people that *use* the bandwidth we pay for, and ISPs HATE us for it. They'd get rid of us any way they have the chance.
This is why all the start-ups that offer no port throttling, no traffic shaping, absolutely no limits and static IPs all DIE. They're shunting through hundreds of times more traffic than normal ISPs, and with a lot less people paying them.
Western internet censorship is becoming common, it's really fucking depressing. All they have to do is say the secret list only blocks CP, AND YOU'RE NOT A PEDO ARE YOU?!? then naturally nobody dares to challenge it.
It's even worse when you consider it in the wider context of moves away from 'net neutrality' and proposed legislation like IPRED2 that will indirectly criminalise filesharing networks, especially anonymous p2p like freenet and i2p, and even software development generally due to the vast number of trivial software patents. A good summary on the freenet mailing list : http://archives.freenetproject.org/message/20060628.130036.22d30ac3.en.html
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-30 17:54
Don't wanna speak to soon, but NTL users (inc myself) are reporting in irc an in the other thread that NTL have unblocked /b/.
Weird. I thought there was no chance in hell.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-30 20:47
NTL (for me) did unblock /b/ for about 3 hours. Now it's giving me the 404 message again.
ZOMG 4chan, ZOMG.
i too had the 3 hr unlblock after justr getting back from uni pre starting a job... but anyway, very fr==drunk after the england mach =.
interestingly, if you
f5 key every 2 seconds pre b block page, you get a connecting to http://data-ops4-glfd.server.ntli.net/ message from firefoxm, go to that fucking site,you get soe=me f=sort of cache page tghe cunts.
even better than that, you have the a http server available, whith a few directories, abnd this dir: http://data-ops4-glfd.server.ntli.net/ehealth/
with four moderately large images, wtf am i saying, massiveimages, at 5 mb a pice, 4 of them: look:
[IMG] 1.jpg 01-Mar-2005 18:32 4.3M
[IMG] 2.jpg 01-Mar-2005 18:32 5.3M
[IMG] nasa1.jpg 01-Mar-2005 02:25 6.8M
[IMG] nasa2.jpg 23-Feb-2005 22:06 5.3M
20 meg the cuntflaps,
how dare they blantantl;y redirect us to 404, this is suck a pisstake it's not even funy. I have, in restrospec decided to post this thru a tor proxy as i dont want to incut=r the wrath from ntl as this is my parents line till i move for my job.; please bitch to them about it, excuse the long typo filled post (as i said drunk).
thanks /b/ and general 4chan tards, we must stand united.
oh yeah, here are image t=links, can you non/uk/ntl etc people get through to this cache, if so leach the shit out of them. here are the links:
20 mb for the 4 images, ctrl+F5 to rea=load from t=ntl servers. go for it.
btw, Moot thanks for your efforts in contacting whoever, but this seems to be a uk battle against non-judge-determined (as in illegal) blocks of sites. We'll have to solve this ourselves.
Banned either way. I'm just banned from the whole of img - whether this is BT or that I actually DID get banned (which is odd because i hardly ever post) I don't know.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-02 13:47
Cross posted in other thread...This is the reply I got from the Internet Watch Foundation:
We can confirm that no part of the URL for the site 4chan.org is included in our live database.
So NTL is blocking it themselves. Wonderful. Now I get to call tech support and complain.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-02 18:17
>>86
That sucks, it's out of line for them to do that. Even worse is they dont just say blocked site, they spoof a blank apache style 404 page. If you go to a random url in 4chan you get yotsuba images with the 404. So they appear to be trying to slip it by as blocked, who knows why.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-03 0:19
It might just be that the ISPs aren't using the latest database yet (i.e. the IWF did have /b/ blocked but corrected their error recently). I can hope, at least.
I would find it difficult to believe that BT and NTL all of a sudden, independantly of each other - decided to block /b/ on the same day. So they probably just lied to you and presumed you were an evil terrorist.
The one hope is what #88 said.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-06 12:59
Does anyone know the first day that this starts? I'm just interested in marking down the last days of free internet..
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-06 14:03
>>90
Already started long ago. You Brits are clueless. I guess they don't tell about their police state measures on news.
Indeed it did, this government has passed a great many evil freedom / privacy removing laws. Some of us know and care, but not enough. The average tabloid reader doesn't really care about "politics" and is easilly persuaded such things will only affect terrorists anyway so it doesn't matter.
Someone just got that banned from all boards for bestiality. >:-(
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-16 17:39
It was me who got the webcache banned.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-16 17:47
I doubt BT has anything to do with the overall ban of our ISP from 4chan, except for the page http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html that was in the IWF database.
I mean, look at this, if BT are redirecting to the ban page they're being clever about it - passing the correct Server header for img.4chan.org back and all. I reckon one of the admins has put a conditional redirect in the Apache configuration file so all BT Internet IP addresses get sent to the ban page:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<TITLE>302 Found</TITLE>
</HEAD><BODY>
<H1>Found</H1>
The document has moved <A HREF="here.http://www.4chan.org/error/banned/">here</A>.<P>;
<HR>
<ADDRESS>Apache/1.3.34 Server at img.4chan.org Port 80</ADDRESS>
</BODY></HTML>
I did. Was some good horse blowing action too, you could see the jizz running out of the sides of her mouth and everything. I guess the mods aren't into horse cock eh?
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-17 16:01
>>107
Do something there. Organize and spread information. You just didn't care. That's why you're country turned into police state, but it might not be too late to fix it.
So speaks the sub-genius from the land of the free (lol).
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-17 16:29
>>112
Face it. It's still quite free land although it has been going downhill for some years. UK is way badder. Patriot act is mild compared to censorship and surveillance practiced daily in UK. UK tends to be very ban crazy too.
So because one bastard thought he was funny, everyone that was allowed access via the webcache now has lost half of 4chan. Thanks a bunch you stupid fuck.
I got too excited and didn't realise, only static content on dat.4chan.org - the imgboard.php script is still on img. Still, better than how it was before.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-17 19:32
>>117
I can see /b/!...but I can't touch it.
Or something to that effect anyway Lol.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-18 8:33
The person in charge of BT's network security, and who oversees the CleanFeed project is Nick Truman. He can be reached at nick.truman@bt.com.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-18 11:16
Huh. I'm on NTL and I didn't notice anything at all at any point in this clusterfuck.
Go figure.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-24 18:38
I never had any problems until now - now /b/ is not accessible by normal channels (although http://66.207.165.178/b/ does work)
That worked for a bit for me, but now I get the 404. And the webcache just got banned AGAIN.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-24 19:37
hmm, now img.4chan.org/b/ and dat.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html redirect to img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html which is blocked on NTL, is this 4chan's doing? if so change it back plz.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-25 13:27
blocked by BT too, having to use the IP version to get it working, if they block that its proxy ahoy
Myself and several of my fellow BT customers have become rather confused about a situation that seems to have affected us all simultaneously. It has come to our attention that no BT user can access the URL http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html or any variation thereof while using BT to connect to the internet.
As with all collectives of people on the internet, rumours are rife; the most prevalent of which concerns BT, the IWF, the Cleanfeed system, or a combination of all three blocking the site due to alleged illegal content. However, we are yet to receive a difinitive answer regarding the exact nature of the block.
I am writing to ask you whether or not the aforementioned URL is in someway 'blacklisted' by either BT or the IWF, or whether or not it is included as part of the cleanfeed system. Earlier today, I made a call to BT customer and technical services, who informed me that they could find no information regarding a BT-initiated 'block' on the domain. However, I appreciate that the people I was speaking to, in their own words, were "not the right people" to ask about the problem, and therefore I would appreciate any light you can shed on this matter.
As you may or may not be aware, the URL in question is one for an anonymous imageboard. This means that any user can post any picture or any text on the site without having to register or enter their name. The site does, however, log their IP address. There is only one rule: No illegal content. Users who breach this rule are banned without hesitation, and their posts are deleted. In the case of a user posting obscene content related to sexual abuse of children or animals, the user is also reported to the relevant authorities, as this is deemed immoral and unacceptable.
I and the other users of the site are completely in support of this rule, and wish to use it simply as a place of discussion and a source of humour.
Therefore, I can see no conflict of interest between http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html and either BT or the IWF. However, I would appreciate any help you could offer in pinpointing the origin of these difficulties.
Regards,
-------------------------------------------
I'm pretty sure that's all true. Let's see how it goes.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-29 14:33
>>127
i don't think he'll notice it through the flood of "OMG WTF HAV U DONE TO 4CHAN YOU DICKDICK GIVE IT BACK OR I WILL HACK YOUR BT"
You guys are probably right. It doesn't really affect me personally - I'm switching ISP to Bulldog in about a week, because they are made of win and god - but I know that for those of us who, for example, have to consult with 35643674645 housemates or weird parents to change their ISP, or are in a contract, this sucks pretty bad.
Also, if it IS the IWF and not a standalone BT thing... then we're all fucked, because all UK ISPs are going to have to use Cleanfeed from 2007 onwards.
... Please tell me the EFF operate in the UK...
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-30 4:57
I wonder if many of those who hate America's deterioration of civil liberties know about the UK. They pull even worse shit than we do.
Seconded. I live here and it's only in the past year I've come to realise exactly how bad we are for laying on our backs and letting our government do whatever the fuck it wants.
It's a really impotent feeling. We often pride ourselves on being somehow 'more civilized' than America. It's just that our stupidity is less openly on display than yours; it doesn't mean it's not there.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-30 7:46
Ok back on topic.
We need a computer geek to come up with another temporary solution to our problem of having no 4chon.
Our first encounter of the "block" was a piss take, but now things have stepped up a notch I havent been able to be a /b/tard in over a week.
The only way is to use proxies, to masquerade as another IP address. The problem there is that they keep getting banned due to people posting beastiality or CP.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-31 0:51
Great stuff - a couple of days after the webcache gets unbanned, some twat goes and posts beastiality again and this time gets it permabanned. I swear if I get hold of him I'll give him some beastiality by beating him to death with a frozen horse-dick.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-31 1:02
.... on top of which, it seems like BT has found out about and blocked the /dat.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html address too - so there's no way in at all now :(
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-31 1:24
I'd suggest widespread complaints, protest marches, withholding your payments, and that sort of thing, but i don't think i can do much to help from here.
Er, not4chan does not currently exist. In addition, child porn very rarely showed up there and always got a quick deletion. It was less common than it is in /b/, actually.
Name:
annoyed2006-07-31 9:04
Aw ffs, got on for a while now its banned AGAIN, seriously this BS is pissing me off big time, fucking moronic BT...
That's what I do and I never have to worry about BT's bans, or the proxy getting banned for horse porns or whatever.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-01 13:48
It's me, the fag who wrote that letter to the IWF guy.
I haven't had a response yet, and I've since managed to switch to Bulldog (as of this morning), so I'm not really expecting him to respond.
I know NTL users can get on /b/ again, but can someone from UKOnline check it out? If even one of those ISPs unblocked it completely, that means it is NOT on cleanfeed - at least, not anymore.
im on ukonline theres 1 way to get around it but, dat.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html, img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html, replacing /b/imgboard.html with /b/? are all blocked, however there is one which works, if you are smart enough you will figure it out but im not passing it out, out of fear that it will be abused in some way and bt will block it off hence leaving the last resort of proxys which people have mentioned about, i know replacing imgboard.html with ? got blocked off after more people started using it
as long you use an adsl service in the UK theres a very large chance you are gonna get blocked since adsl companies rent exchange space off BT
also have you had any luck with them moot (if you are still following this)
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-01 21:01
I have an idea that 4chan could do. No doubt you guys will tell me everything that's wrong with it (first coming to mind being "Too much effort"), but meh.
Maybe 4chan could make a read-only ban system for proxies, i.e. so people on webcache.bt.net can't post but can read? Sure, people with static IPs should be punished for posting bestiality and cp. But how much harm can someone do from reading 4chan from a proxy? Read only /b/ > No /b/
the only way to get rid of the CP is to get rid of /b/.
a small price to pay.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-08 7:37
if you get rid of b all of the btards will have nowhere to go and you will have to deal with them in your favorite forums. and id rather not have to deal with them in /s/.
I think what happens is that they remove the URL but no-one bothers updating their list for removals, only additions. Hence, BT and Google still block /b/ despite it not being a pedo haven.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-09 22:34
Ok, I can get back onto /b/ again.
I wish those nice technicians at BT would stop playing games with us :(
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-10 15:50
/b/ is back for UKOnline here. As a test of IWF's policies, I've sent them a report of a real CP board and seen how long it takes for them to block it. As of now, it's still up :(
>>166
LOL, how do you find real CP board in first place? There's no such thing. Infact I have seen one, but that was very underground Japanese BBS several years ago. Seriously what pedo ring do you belong if you run into such boards?
I responded that I had no administrative affiliation with 4chan, and that I was just a member of the British public, who would be affected by Cleanfeed in 2007. I said that I would like some reassurance that Cleanfeed will WORK and only block sites with child abuse images rather than ones that just allow users moderated posting access. In other words, I repeated the question.
I got this:
-----------------------------------------
There is no secret about our database, it contains URLs of potentially illegal child abuse content, hosted anywhere in the world, that would be illegal for anyone to download in the UK.
I'm leaving it here, because I'm probably going to be working abroad in a few weeks, and I can't really FIGHT THE CAUSE if I can't even claim this is going to affect me. :(
We need something like the EFF in Britain, I swear...
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-15 16:30
If anyone can be bothered to sign up to the forum at critest.com I'm sure they'd love to see this thread. They are not the biggest fans of the IWF.
I would guess that filthy paedos like the guy who runs critest.com generally aren't overly enamoured by the IWF.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-19 17:26
>>149
a winnrar is you
im on a library computer right now and the second one worked to let me on /b/
thank you
now i can learn all about candle jack and how he is going to ge
>>173
>There is no secret about our database, it contains URLs of potentially illegal child abuse content, hosted anywhere in the world, that would be illegal for anyone to download in the UK.
What the fuck? Potentially illegal?
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-22 18:57
>>177
good job reading!
i was on a public library's computer which has 4chan banned and i am again
thus here to get that link again
thanks again
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-03 17:22
I think IWF or at least NTL has /b/ on their b& list again :(
Redirects to the generic 4chan banned page. Then again NTL web traffic all goes through cached proxies so that might have been IP banned.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-03 18:12
>>181
If you're getting the b& page it's because the proxy you're going though is b& by 4chan. If NTL were blocking it, I doubt they would go to the trouble of redirecting to that, they would more likely just return 404 or somesuch.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-01 15:57
NTL have gone and blocked me now *in north west london* currently using the '?' trick to avoid 404 shit, this is ridiculous considering I wasn't blocked up until last week.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-04 8:12
I'm on NTL in the SE UK and have never, ever had a single problem accessing 4Chan in anyway.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-04 9:01
>>173
It's your own fault what your country has turned into. Besides most of you seem to be enjoying it as there's not much complaints. Afterall you people voted those bastards, even though they have been making your country into police state, since 90s.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 12:01
I'm re-blocked now
i've been unblocked for like 4 months
and now it's suddenly re-blocked.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 12:11
Ditto; I've been blocked again! I'm a /b/ lurker (never post) and BT Internet user; refreshed page about 20 minutes ago to find I'd been banned! :(
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 12:26
same here. bt broadband. direct connection or webcache not working
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 13:19
Blocked.
This is ridiculous.
I will call BT.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 13:28
I cannot get on /b/ either, just get a 404.
I'm in UK and on BT.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 13:35
I'm on the phone calling BT tech support - I'm on hold.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 13:40
Their Call centre in India can't access it. =P
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 13:48
Well, after talking with 'Aruna' at BT Technical Support on 0845 600 7030 - She tells me that a) She can't access /b/ and she isn't using BT Broadband, and b) BT is not blocking any websites. I asked her if she was sure, she said 'Yes pretty sure.' I said, 'You're -PRETTY- sure?' and she said 'Yes 100% sure.'
So make of that what you will.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 14:02
lawd im using bt yahoo and im blocked again :<
the callcentre is obvs on bt too, but WHY did you ask her to go on /b/? for gods sake man, what if the first image was gay porn? you stupid nigra.
So? Chances of her seeing something ACTUALLY -illegal- = 10,000 to 1.
Also: How would I communicate the problem to those dumb shits without telling them what site was being blocked?
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 14:52
i went on /b/ through a public proxy, its slow, but if you are desperate for a fix, it's better than nothing.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 16:34
>>196
yeah its ok to do that but its a ballache using a public proxy on the web due to the speeds etc, and even more of a ballache setting the proxy in tools>options EVERY single time you want to go on /b/, which for me is like every day.
But then again its not much use us blabbering on if nothing is done by BT :S
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 16:40
/b/ blocked here on BTOpenworld (business broadband)
FFS. Will have to look up a proxy...
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-06 23:57
FUCK YOU BT. FUCK YOU
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 6:42
>>199
It's not BTs fault. It's fault of your goverment. They fund and organized that censorship in first place. Wake up from your dream your Brits. You have become a police state and sadly you don't seem to even realize it. Worst thing is that it's getting even worse.
This is why i'm getting the fuck out of here as soon as possible.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 9:10
you all should google for public proxy servers.
not all of them are slow.
i found a reasonably fast one in finland, i can hardly notice the difference.
This thread is not for arguing about government afforded rights. Please GTFO both of you.
PS: BT here, can't access /b/. =(
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 15:33
Also BT, also no longer able to see /b/ :(
SORRY to go off-topic and fuel that idiot but what police state you crazy non-British person? It isn't actually like 1984 or V for Vendetta here you know! You'd be very hard pressed to find anyone who is a BRITISH CITIZEN who thinks they're being genuinely persecuted beyond the increasing cost of council tax, it's merely those who have delusional designs on us becoming an Islamic state...
Looking at the dates of the posts, it seems that the other day there was a massive /b/ ban. I had NEVER had any problems with /b/ (i'm on BT yahoo) but then yesterday, i refreshed the page, and BAM, i got a banned notice.
At first I thought sum mod was angry at me, cause I posted a link to download the new Transformers movie script, and had major spoilers in my post (caps locked for cruise control and massive damage). Then i refreshed again and got the 404 error.
I'm very interested to see how this is gonna turn out. VIVA LA /B/!
Had the problem initially a few months ago, manipulated the webcache to allow me in again, worked fine for some time, then a couple of days ago I got the ban followed by a wall of 404s.
I will definitely talk to BT Tech support again, if you guys can give me some kind of proof that this is not a 4chan-side problem. Next time I talk to them, I will try to get this problem escalated (Beating in mind their tech support is in India - I'M NOT RACIST - but yeah, it's difficult talking to those indians. =( . . )
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 16:46
Apparently they ban sites which could potentially be used for illegal stuff. ANY site you post pictures and videos on can be used to post illegal stuff on. And like /b/, them sites delete the images and videos quickly.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 16:57
>>211
We should messagebomb their online tech support shit.
unfortunately i uninstalled it, but if it gives me a chance to spam the shit out of them, i'll reinstall BT's aids-infected software.
On another note, BT don't allow xbox live, yet another reason NOT TO USE BT YAHOO.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 20:21
After spending 1.5 hours + on the phone with their tech support, I have had this issue escalated to level 1 - their 'backend' people are working on it and will report back to me by tuesday.
I clearly explained what /b/ was and that it was a message board, and they repeatedly told me that BT was not blocking any websites.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 20:32
It seems to have been a problem for me since my ip (and all my routing stuff on BT's end) went from 81.*.*.* to 217.*.*.* (What it used to be ages ago). Possibly they've done some kind of big changeover, and so it's back to an old list of blocked sites?
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 20:41
My IP is still 81.154.72.234 and has been all along, and I'm still blocked. =(
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-07 21:07
i renewed my ip back to the 86.129 range, still banned.(turn your router off for a while, then back on again)
all the bt webcache proxies are giving 404s too.
Yep I was also blocked on the 6th October from /b/ and I'm using BTInternet. I was gonna email them but, if they've blocked /b/ because THEY think it has CP, they might start tracing my activies online because I mention that I like to visit /b/. Stupid I know, but it's something that BT would do.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-08 10:37
BT user here. The webcache fix doesn't work for me. This is perplexing.
JESUS WTF DO I DO GUYZ?
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-08 11:01
Just wait till it becomes nation wide for all internet providers :(
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-08 11:42
in firefox, go to tools/options/connection settings
internet explorer go to tools/internet options/connections/Lan settings
copypasta proxy from one of those links.(remember to change the port too)
it might take a while to find a working one, but there are some
reasonably fast proxies on there.
If you ask for /b/imgboard.html, this is what happens:
GET /b/imgboard.html HTTP/1.1
Host: img.4chan.org
HTTP/1.x 403 Forbidden
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 18:14:07 GMT
Content-Type: text/html
Connection: close
Pragma: no-cache
Entirely forbidden, and a quite different sort of response from the others in that there is no "Server: Apache/1.3.34" header listed.
I'm on BT - can anyone using NTL share their browser headers please?
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-10 18:29
This is really starting to piss me off.
I joined BT back in may, and there was a 404 redirection then. i was fine till now and it hits me again. I'm sure somewhere in the Human Rights Act of 2000 theres a means for us to fuck them (wiki:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Act_%28UK%29), but just gotta find it and throw it at them.
If we were american, we'd be throwing the constitution at them
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-11 20:18
mgggi4
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-12 4:56
Still blocked.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-12 11:43
This is getting re-fucking-diculous.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-12 12:02
I'm sad :-(
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-13 8:50
Again, you can blame the pedos for knacking up our /b/. I emailled the head of the IWF asking what the deal was:
--
Hello Peter,
Could you please tell me if the above URL has been re-entered into your
blocking database, and for what reasons? It looks like BT Internet has
blocked it using their CleanFeed service again.
Regards
Richard C Mongler
--
Hi Richard
Yes it was re-entered because it was displaying an indecent image of
child abuse. That image has now been removed and so the url has been
reinstated.
When I read your post I honestly thought you were a troll. Then I check /b/ and it's working!
Thank you Anonymous. I indeed blame the pedos.
What frustrated me most was not knowing why /b/ was blocked, so I thank you most of all for revealing the cause of the blockage. Good work anonymous, I will drink in your name tonight.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-13 12:51
>>235
No problem, I'm glad you found it helpful. Here's a followup email I sent:
--
Thanks for the information, and I appreciate the work that you guys do in preventing illegal images from being viewed.
Would it be possible, on sites such as 4chan where the aim of the site has nothing to do with glorifying child abuse (indeed, images of such are explicity banned) but that rely on user-submitted content, to just block the url of the offending image rather than larger sections of the site? It can be frustrating having the site blocked for days at a time because some paedophile decided to spam it with images, and no moderators being available at that time to remove it.
Sounds like a great idea, if they can do it - after all, it's impossible to PREVENT CP being posted without destroying what 4chan is all about (i.e. posting images). I'd be greatful to know of any response to this email. Additionally, if the email address you're communicating with isn't already general knowledge, can we keep it on the 'down-low'? Just to stop any sort of /b/ invasion which could risk chances of getting /b/ unbanned in the future? Maybe I'm just being paranoid. =D
That's what the serious side of me is saying. The /b/ side of me is giggling like a little girl because the president of the IWF is having a conversation with Richard C. Mongler.
He responded saying that they're trying to find a "satisfactory and practical solution" to this. I think he's trying to get in contact with the admins to talk about their policies, so I passed on the contacts I know.
So it looks like good news. With luck, the pedos will be stopped without collateral damage to /b/.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-14 3:29
>>239
Acceptable policies = retarded unnecessary rules and that won't happen
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-14 3:31
>>236
Stop lying man. CP is banned, but images glorifying child abuse are mighty fine and common in /b/.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-14 7:34
>>183 here, /b/ has been unblocked by NTL today, for how long we'll have to see.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-14 8:32
/b/ has also been unblocked by BT. This is getting really odd.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-14 16:51
yes, ntl is ok for me again too.
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-14 16:52
what i want to know, is what ASSHAT keeps spamming IWF with reports on /b/ it's obvious that they are deleted asap.
I emailed IWF today for the first time. Sorry it's taken so long for me to address the issue. Can somebody please bring me up to speed as to what the current situation is? Thanks.
Currently, /b/ is unblocked but every time they get a complaint about some CP being posted it gets blocked again, sometimes for weeks. It seems to be a race to see who will get to the image first - 4chan's mods to delete it, or IWF's CP experts to block /b/ in the UK.
Are they willing to work with us on the matter? Who should I contact?
This isn't very fair since it can happen just as easily on a site like Flickr but I don't see them taking action against a Yahoo company any time soon! :(
Okay, so when they do a block are they blocking just the /b/ DIRECTORY, the entire SUBDOMAIN, or the entire SITE? I need this clarified so I can respond to the email I got this morning :(
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-21 7:49
When I'm blocked, I can access the main SITE, and all the other boards (/ck/, /s/, /v/, etc) but the /b/ directory is blocked. I can't tell you if they block the subdomain because I think /b/ is the only thing on the img subdomain at the moment.
What's more (not sure if this applies), but the 404 page that I personally get when /b/ is blocked is not the default Firefox 404 page, nor is it 4chan's 404 page.
I'm on ntl.
When /b/ is banned, only /b/ is banned for me, the rest of the site is perfectly fine, including /t/ /d/ /y/ and anything else I look at. It was banned for about a week ending on October 14th.
Based on the workarounds used, the primary method of blocking is to redirect http://img.4chan.org/b/imgboard.html to a generic page that says the page wasn't found, rather than 4chan's own 404 or b& pages. The sub-domain itself (as in orz or zip, right?) seems unaffected.
Slight alterations of this, such as adding question marks, work well, as does using the server's number to access the board.
The only workaround that works for myself on BT when /b/ is blocked is using a proxy.
At first, we could use the webcache proxy maintained by BT (God knows what it is), which was very fast, and gave no problems. But now when /b/ is blocked, that proxy blocks it too.
So I'm left with public proxies, which suck enormous donkey balls. ;_;
Name:
Anonymous2006-10-25 8:28
>267
Ah, well I'm on NTL, so they must implement it differently from BT.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-13 12:17
banned from /b/ due to ntl sharing our ip's ;_;
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-26 9:09
Assuming that the site is still being blocked, could anyone here who uses Linux run a 'tcptraceroute' so that we can identify the router which is intercepting the requests.
Any form of ISP censorship is absolutely appalling. What are they going to start blocking next?
Stupid non-GMT times, afaik my entire 4chan is loading pages from several hours ago, but it could be a few minutes ago or summat. A few minutes ago it seemed to go back to normal, but now they're frozen on these new posts.
I hate to be the one telling you all this, but this is a bigger problem... SOB:s are monitoring traffic between clients and servers. This is only a symptom of the Orwellisation of the entire network. Welcome to the future.
The cheap way to fix it is to write a script that generates /b/:s at reqular intervals. Luckily moving things in unix is pretty easy and generating the link is no harder. You can also use a symbolic link. They can ofcourse ban the whole site, which they probably will given some time.
Which brings me to the real solution: SSL and gateways. By proxying(gateway) the server instead of the client the admin can know the IP:s of the clients. SSL means the ISP has a harder time spying on the packets - even if you keep the encryption pretty trivial like RC4 or DES, I doubt they will ever notice. This will ofcourse cost, but it is preferable to the annihilation of /b/.
>>292
Packet sniffer. Best packet sniffers, Packetyzer for windows and Wireshark for Linux. They probably have scripts too which pick up the more interesting snippets(eg. the 'JFIF' in a jpeg header) from the logs. It's the way the internet works, anything can be picked up at any point inbetween client and server, unless it is encrypted. This is why everyone uses SSH now instead of TELNET. And if >>253 is true that is exactly what is happening.
Name:
Anonymous2007-06-29 14:55 ID:bAKLe7UP
>>292
And yes, gb2 Alabama with that knowledge is criminal attitude. They teach this stuff at school.
Name:
BIG BROTHER,2007-06-30 8:02 ID:X5etRxyc
>>294
Oh well, If they are going to those lenghts to catch out the handful of /b/ britfags, let them, make them earn their cookie. Fuck it, I really con't be bothered with all this conspiracy bullshit. IMA GO BACK TO /b/ NAO.
>>>What's the difference between the server and the admin?
>>What's the difference between the car and the driver?
>What's the difference between the hammer and the hand?
Sorry to bump this after it's been stale for a month, but it seemed somewhat apropos.
U.S. users are about to get something similar, it seems:
"US net firms to block child porn" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7446637.stm
"Three of the biggest US internet service providers have agreed to block access to bulletin boards and websites that carry images of child sex abuse."
The ISPs in question are Verizon, Sprint, and Time-Warner. The article goes on to say that New York's Attorney General (who is spearheading the campaign) is in negotiations with other ISPs, as well, so we will probably soon have no choice.
What it DIDN'T say was that these ISPs are also notifying their customers that their net use is to be monitored, and that any CP or SUSPICION of CP will be reported to the authorities. As impractical as this seems, it is still a privacy issue (yes, I know we've BEEN being monitored for anti-terrorism purposes for some time now, but this purpose is new).
This is odd to me, as I always understood that ISPs, being common carriers, were not legally allowed to filter or monitor content. I'll be a little surprised if there isn't a legal challenge to this (last I knew, the monitoring issue was ALREADY being challenged).
I'm not in favor of CP, but I don't like censoring the internet, either. A further, practical problem lies in WHO determines what is and isn't "child sex abuse," and what it means to "carry" those images. Will I soon lose access to 4chan, despite its best attempts at being anti-CP? What about 420chan, which has had run-ins with hosting services before? Will not4chan be blocked and browsing it risk being turned in to the police, despite the fact that it is full of drawings and not photos? Furthermore, where does it stop? Today it's CP at issue, will it be piracy tomorrow (Comcast is already doing that, aren't they?)? These issues, even more so than the basic question of censorship, seem to be glaring problems to me.
I was under the impression that they were ignoring everything BUT Usenet, and that they'd start to filter out some Usenet groups and posts.
Some of them already filter Usenet for spam.
About the COMMON CARRIER stuff - does that still work if they have strict AUPs/TOSs? Can they claim to be a COMMON CARRIER if they don't allow abusive posting?
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-11 23:10
>>309
Yeah, the more thorough article I read today said it was MOSTLY just USENET. They will not, after all, be BLOCKING websites, though they will be more vigilant than before about TOS'ing sites they host. Sprint and Time-Warner are dropping USENET entirely, while Verizon just plans to remove certain parts of the tree (I won't be too surprised if they stop carrying alt.binaries.* entirely). The monitoring aspect still bothers me a lot, though.
As for the common carrier thing, I suspect you have a point. They've been trying to have it both ways for a while now. Personally, I wish they'd go back to the true common carrier approach, and let the network police itself (and make the RL police do their OWN damn job according to the rule of law, instead of doing it FOR them in such a way as to get around privacy rights).
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-16 1:16
I'm worried some of the images i clicked on may have been child abuse. Is there a chance i could get caught for clicking on the links?
This is really pissing me off.
I'm on BT and yesterday I could access /b/ and now its blocking me from it.
This better get resloved soon because im really pissed off with all this censorship.
Most /b/tards dont actully go near CP!
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-27 17:08
Looks like this could be a sign of things to come, hehe.
Enjoy your time while you still can.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-27 17:12
wtf this started in 06?
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-27 17:42
I WANT MY 4CHAN BACK
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-27 17:52
>>323
Yep. /b/ has gone on and off the BT block list sporadically over the the last few years. You can blame the people posting CP.
It's usually never on for long, implying that it's being put there automatically by bots, and then removed by human auditing.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-27 18:16
No need to blame anyone.
Just sort the goram problem.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-27 18:47
someone call BT or something
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-27 19:17
Call BT?
Look, no-one here has the thousands of man-hours necessary to hammer something through that wall they call Customer-Service.
Best hope is someone IN BT is a /b/tard and sets something in motion
BTfag here.
I think the img.4chan ban has been lifted, or for me anyway. I can go on /b/ and /r9k/. It seems that at random I get redirected to www.4chan.org like >>330.
Name:
Turnip!yQ1LVKtZkk2009-05-28 11:03
*It doesn't happen all the time though.
Name:
csscs2009-05-28 11:55
Lol this is bs..I only go there for the lulz sometimes it lets me go on there sometimes it don't fuck BT and NTL
Name:
Anonymous!l3G4ErUHkc2009-05-28 12:09
Since when is internet censorship even legal in Britain?
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 12:29
wat. i still get redirected to www.4chan.org if i don't get the banned page.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 13:37
im in UK on BT and /b/ works fine for me.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 14:29
I didn't think that internet censorship was legal in the UK. Surely I should have the freedom to go on any website I choose and I take the risks if it lies in a moral grey area. If I change my proxy and use /b/ now, will there be a risk of the party van coming to my door for viewing "CP"?
Will this ban ever lift?
FUCK BT.
I hope you respect my postition, and seriously, check out this CP.
The someone who informed IWF could have been those fel0ny faggots, if they were real.
But I didn't pay attention to that internet drama so I don't know
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 16:31
I'm with BT and can't access /b/, it just redirects me to www.4chan.org. The annoying this is that it's only just started doing this, yesterday it was fine.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 16:37
Im exactly the same as poster 342..
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 16:43
>>342 here
I've just checked /r9k/ and that redirects me too. It seems BT doesn't like the img.4chan server.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 17:19
Has anyone noticed that /b/ has been going down every hour and thats when you are redirected. I am with bt and it does sometimes let me on /b/ so I dont know whats happening.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 17:40
FUUUUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu BT
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 17:41
on BT here, it's up and down like a hoor's drawers all day. Back up at the moment.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 17:44
I'm with BT and I keep getting re-directed to the ban page, but I was able to access /b/ earlier today, fucking internet police faggots.
Ive been able to get on sparadically through today.
go on status.4chan,
if it says /b/ is up you can go on.
Name:
Anonymous2009-05-28 18:27
Hint. Change your dns settings to use a service like opendns as the IWF's blacklist is checked when resolving domain names.
Coincidentally, this is why accessing the site by the ip address works. No domain name lookup = nothing to check against the IWF's blacklist unless the ip address/ip range has been added to it.
Ergo, using dns servers outside of the IWF's remit (ie, those not provided by UK ISPs or indeed, anywhere within the UK) sidesteps the whole net censorship thing until the UK government begins hiring people who have a fucking clue when it comes to IT.
Basically, change your DNS servers, get the access you pay for.
Note: if you subsequently choose to do something illegal with your newly unfettered access, it's not like they didn't try to stop you, have fun in prison ^_^
I am a BT customer. when i go to 4chan.org it 403's. but but if i google or type the specific board it works, non of the boards are blocked for me just the 4chan hom page :/ hop this helps you 4Chan addicts who are with BT...
On an unrelated note...
How do you post words like "faggot" and "moot" on /b/ without it being turned into another phrase?
Sorry, I'm a bit of a newfag (1-2 years?), and don't know how to undo it.
Thanks in advance.
Sister said to me:"Get coach bags please！And look out of the window. What a fine day! Let's go to park,"It was really a good day, So my mother, my classmate and I went to the park. On the way to the park. I saw coach canada the blue sky with snow-white clouds. I saw pear trees and some apple trees and so on. Below the trees, there are several kinds of flowers. It's colorful, blue, red, yellow, pink, purple, orange and white.I saw some coach purses balloons and butterflies in the sky. I ate popcorn, cornflakes, banana and lollipop. They were wonderful. In the afternoon, we went to coach outlet store. I visited the birds, mice, cats, dogs, budgies, hamsters, rabbits and so on. http://www.offical-coach.com/
Skechers shape ups is an award-winning worldwide leader in the lifestyle footwear industry. The company designs, develops and markets skechers uk shoes that appeal to trend-savvy men, women and children around the globe. Braced by an ingenious global marketing strategy energized by innovative print and television advertising they continue to flourish. Skechers sale success stems from a diverse, high-quality product line that meets many lifestyle needs. With the myriad of shape ups shoe options available, there’s sure to be a few perfect-for-you designs available here! http://www.skecher-shoes.org/