Research project at VTC


Research Cyber is Good

Peter Church and Justine Edwards


Working to halt online abuse

Mission Statement
The mission of WHOA is to educate the Internet community about online harassment, empower victims of harassment, and formulate voluntary policies that systems administrators can adopt in order to create harassment-free environments. WHOA fully supports the right to free speech both online and off, but asserts that free speech is not protected when it involves threats to the emotional or physical safety of anyone. WHOA further asserts that online harassment is about power in a community: a power structure that has tended to accept or ignore harassment rather than actively seek to cease it.
Goals and Implementations
1. Educate the Internet Community About Harassment.
This will take several forms:
a. Educating administrators of BBS’s, chats, IRC servers, web sites and other interactive media about the issues of harassment and creating positive, safe communities through the development of web site resources. b. Educating the community c. Educating targets of harassment
2. Empowering Targets of Harassment
In addition to education about what they can do to fight back, WHOA will provide advice and referral to targets of harassment.
3. Providing Policies For a Better Internet Community
All of these policies will seek to encourage administrators to use the control they have over the use of their resources to remove any persons causing offenses to those policies that are either severe or repeated.1
WHOA receives an average of 100 cases per week, but some victims choose not to provide the demographic data.
Out of 280 million population


Voluntary ethics

Free speech

Police action

Posted by michael on Tuesday January 23, @02:00PM from the bring-out-the-gimp dept. pcosta writes “Today’s LA Times has an article about a Supreme Court hearing on wheteher or not ‘virtual’ child porn created with computer generated images is illegal. In a previous ruling, the federal appeals court in San Francisco agreed 2-1 that the 1st Amendment prohibits the government from making it a crime to generate “images of fictitious children engaged in imaginary but explicit sexual conduct”. But prosecutors said this kind of pornography can whet the appetite of pedophiles, and therefore is dangerous even if no real children are involved.” This will be one of the major free speech cases of the year, and I think there’s no telling how the Supreme Court will decide.

Dangerous topics

Bomb making

Drug synthesis


Techniques for committing crimes 1

Hate sites Nazi

White supremacist
Black nationalist

Facilitating conspiracy



Identity shifting

On-line gambling, chartrooms


Compulsive gambling

Child molestation

Character effects

People more violent

More anti social

Less patient

Less tolerant



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s