how were these even in existence? farked up.

I think it's wrong to have child predator chat rooms. We saw how easily it was for that adult predator to pick up on Arnold's foul language... lord knows what these impressionable children will be saying.

SLAYER!

EvilJordan wins the thread.

One of the deacons from my church got busted by the feds for this type of stuff.

there goes my weekend

/who's that at the door?

This should have a DUMBASS tag. Why didn't they do that before?

In Yahoo's defense, it's not like there enough people to do nothing but peruse every single group to see what is being discussed. I mean, a lot of these freaks use code words to bypass filtering mechanism's. I mean, what if I started a Yahoo group called "Gordon Jump's Bike Shop" and talked about Dudleying somebody. How many people would know what the "real subject" of that group was.

Am I the only one who believes hell has an ironic punishments division? That for Child Predators, their punishment is to be reduced to four feet in height and preyed upon by nine foot tall demons?


Yahoo can't honestly be a hero in this case. It was bound to happen that they'd find these chatrooms and shut them down. More will spring up, and those too will be shutdown.

mwenyeji: how were these even in existence?
AOL and Yahoo both had chat rooms called "13-17 year olds" for high school age kids to chat in (I'm not sure if AOL still does it.) The problem was you get people over 18 (some way over 18) going into these rooms to pickup what they think is a 13 year old when they find out it was a FBI agent.
Yahoo chat rooms are 95% bots advertising p0rn sites anyways

elvindeath

Um, you want to fix my maytag? Is that what you are saying?

/what are you wearing right now?

mwenyeji: how were these even in existence? farked up.

User created rooms.

Now if they can get rid of the spam bots, it might be worth looking at again.

Okay, and in other news, do any of these losers who go on these chat sites HONESTLY believe the person responding to them is actually a 14 year old girl who is into a fat middle aged dude ? In the history of the internet, has any 14 year old in a chat room been an actual 14 year old girl, and not just a Sheriff's Deputy ? Thank god these freaks are not smart.

Yahoo still has chat rooms? I thought *all* the user created ones were closed.

Those evil moralists at Yahoo! The country is going to hell when sexual predators can't run their own chat room.

Why wouldn't they just monitor the chatroom once it's been flagged, and track people who post about committing crimes? That information could save lives. Meh.

I work for Yahoo.

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you dont know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cuz some farkers belive anything they hear.

elvindeath

never mind. I get it.

Different strokes for different folks....

As for the old news (point 2) in the headline, I think the submitter is remembering when AOL did something similar some time back.

And I don't know if anyone has been in yahoo chat rooms lately, but it seems like they're just bot congregations...

CruJones WINS THE THREAD!!!

/almost fell out of my chair

3) how are they going to know that any given other chat room isn't being used by child predators?

Yahoo is small potatoes, if you value your soul, don't ever download a full channel listing or any of the major IRC nets. That's a sick, sick, sick backwater of disgustingness.

Oh, and pmuse.... nah, not worth the effort of detailing the stupidity anymore.

can someone point me to the thread where the "I work for" cliche started?

I think i'm one of the only people on this site who finds it amusing.

[B]Danger Mouse - [/B] It is a credit to you that the Different Strokes "pervert bike shop" episode did not leap immediately to mind. I, on the other hand, have been unable to wipe that episode from my mind from the first time I saw it about 20 years ago. Ugh.

mwenyeji
how were these even in existence? farked up.

They're user-created channels ("rooms," whatever). Submit a request to create a channel, give it a name ("Fark", the name of your town, or any example listed in the article), and presto! Chatserver spits out an instance of "channel" with the given name.

The term "designed" in the article is blatantly incorrect. Stuff like this pisses me off.

If they can fix this in the next 24 hours, why the he## were they allowed to exist in the first place.

Look were making money here so let it ride until we are legally forced to do something about it.

//I really hate corporate asshats??

PedroWonStopVoting


It was a Jessica Simpson thread from last week. It was wedged in between a thread about Britney and Lindsey Lohan

Will the people who use the "I work for..." cliche please die already?

Yes, yes, you probably are, Pedro.


/most asinine cliches are at least short

PedroWonStopVoting

Here ya go

It's somewhere near the bottom 1/3 of the page and was posted by carsoap

/it pops

Child predator?

Willis: I didn't know that Mr. Horton was, well, you know, gay.
Detective: You know Willis, that's a common misconception about child molesters. They're not gay. In fact, they love children. They just don't know how to express that love.

Elvindeath, forgive me if I'm misquoting, I'm reciting from memory the best all-time TV dialogue quote of all time, of all time.

StanleyJames:

If they can fix this in the next 24 hours, why the he## were they allowed to exist in the first place.

Look were making money here so let it ride until we are legally forced to do something about it.

It's more a matter of their "hands-off" policy towards they're users. I doubt Yahoo's profit margin will move even one iota due to the presence or absence of child predators on its site. But now that they've agreed to monitor users, they've opened themselves to liability in that area if something awful still happens. It's similar to how eBay(?) was charged under european anti-nazi laws for allowing Nazi memorablilia to be sold on its site.

To correct AG Bruning:

"Because of this agreement, Yahoo chat rooms are a safer place today, pedophiles now have to resort to deceit and pursuit of children throughout Yahoo-chat instead of waiting in their own room for children to arrive." said Jon Bruning, Nebraska's attorney general, in a statement.

/Have Sharpie, will travel.

elvindeath: some 14 year old misguided hussie in my area was killed by an older man whom she met online. No idea if he had sex with her before or after that incident, but the news said she had a history of "dating" "older men".

/Yuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!

sad that this news is released on the same day that Yahoo and msn have agreed to merge their IM products, so NOW they do not have to try so hard to compete with AOL.

I agree with dewihafta, this should have had a dumbass tag because this was previous news and regardless they should not have been there in the first place. There will always be predators in chat rooms, but when they are allowed to open rooms called "young girls for older men" and stuff like that, it makes it too easy, Yahoo is basically facilitating crime.

I've been boycotting Yahoo for a long time. The way they provide their services has never impressed me, and I got really ticked off when they tried to strong-arm Xfire out of business, saying they have a patent on something or other when they don't provide any service like Xfire's and if they did half of it would be an advertisement.

They also shut down the "Michigan meets for sex" chat room and I haven't been laid since.

Yahoo is small potatoes, if you value your soul, don't ever download a full channel listing or any of the major IRC nets. That's a sick, sick, sick backwater of disgustingness.

Oh, and pmuse.... nah, not worth the effort of detailing the stupidity anymore.

Which is even smaller potatoes compared to the illicit trade on the usenet and softnet markets.

I subscribe to an unlimited usenet server for downloading ISO's music, etc.. however the full group listings can be rather disturbing.

Expecially when you see some with enough postings to turn over in a week.

/shudders

I work for Yahoo.

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you dont know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cuz some farkers belive anything they hear.



Gee...sounds like I heard something Exactly like this before on the Yoko Ono thread and a couple of others. I mean exactly. The only difference is the "I work for..." part.

To all trolls Come up with something original you helmet wearin', window lickin', short bus ridin', farktards! I don't mind if you troll, as long as it's at LEAST original, but if you can't do better than cut an paste, go back to masturbating in your momma's basement to the nude patch of "Tomb Raider" and let your betters talk.

Danger Mouse: Um, you want to fix my maytag? Is that what you are saying?

"My hovercraft is full of eels!"

And this is why I don't let my tween chat online. Period. WAY too many sickos.

If you think is all, check out Google Groups. Why they chose to pick pedophilia oriented newsgroups to include in their list of newsgroups, while ignoring easily 10,000 other newsgroups for inclusion, is a puzzle. The alt.(kiddieporn/pedophilia) newsgroups were there in several selections from the first launch of Google Groups.

Ahh fudge, my quotes got obliterated

what the hell

xero69 - that's horrible. I guess there are kids that age who just flat out don't know any better (heck, just turn on Maury one night for proof) ... it's just sad though.

As for the poster who said they don't monitor because they open themselves up to liability, that's absolutely correct. That's common in law - you can agree not to do something (like monitor for content) and have people agree to it in Terms of Service, but you can't elect to do something and then do it improperly.

Also, for copyright purposes under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, better to operate pass-through services that just agree to remove offending content upon receiving notice rather than taking the burden to proactively search for it.