Dumb lawyers and Flash screw up "No to Knives" campaign
Britain's Royal Armouries have launched their "No To Knives" campaign to stop knife-crime in the UK. However, the site is an hilarious and ridiculous mess, thanks to bad Flash and worse lawyers. Danny O'Brien lays it out:
* It's all in Flash.Link
* It's aiming to get 1,000,000 people to pledge not to carry knives on the hard streets of Britain
* So far, they've got seven.
* I can't link to anything on it, because it's all in Flash.
* But that's okay, because the terms of conditions would ban me from doing so anyway:
You may link to our home page, provided you do so in a way that is fair and legal and does not damage our reputation or take advantage of it, but you must not establish a link in such a way as to suggest any form of association, approval or endorsement on our part where none exists. You must not establish a link from any website that is not owned by you.
* Also, I had to quote that bit, because they also say:
We may revise these terms of use at any time by amending this page. You should check this page from time to time to take notice of any changes we made, as they are binding on you. Some of the provisions contained in these terms of use may also be superseded by provisions or notices published elsewhere on our website.
* Amusingly, the terms and conditions are the only page that I can link to, because it's the only page not in Flash.
* ...unlike their accessibility page, which you can only get to in (inaccessible) Flash.
the latest
latest episodes
Yet, despite all the it's pointless anyway... I'm sure that out of the (I think) 60 million living in the UK at the moment, far less than 1 million are carrying knives in the first place. You could get 59 million signatures from people who will honour the pledge and yet not stop a single knife crime.
This is appalling - and it's the result of pisspoor standards in UK govt management of communication and public service advertising. The whole shebang, spending megamillions, is run by untrained, untalented, self-important civil servants who know zilch about the skills and disciplines needed. I know, I've had them as clients. What they really like to do is hire expensive ad agencires, who smooch them a lot, then hand the work over to junior creatives who just wanna have fun and get no strategic input nor proper management. Result - crap, ineffectual self-indulgent work like this and whole lot of UK taxpayers' money down the crapper.
TBH one of the reasons I dislike how Flash is how overused it is these days. Examples like this one right here just reinforce my perception that most people that get into web design are nowadays clueless about properly doing their job. I mean, I'm possibly less qualified onpaper than any of them, but my websites use pretty much only HTML, CSS and images, even if making a flash-only website would be quicker and less troublesome to adapt to Internet Explorer/Mozilla/Opera/Everything Else.
I've just submitted an entry:
"Peaceful Gun Owner"
It wasn't promoting any illegal activity, as it is possible to own a gun in the U.K.
It wasn't hateful or violent.
It was not threatening.
It wasn't in any way discriminating.
It was certainly original.
Somehow though.. I don't think it'll be accepted.
The dumbest thing about the website is the length of time it takes to load. Most of these knife-crimes kiddos are impatient and have ADHD and 56k modems.
Is there a way to put a link to my own terms and condition in the http header?
I'd like to have my web browser send a header with a link to something that says "By fulfilling my HTTP request, you agree to the following..."
followed by lots of one-sided, friendly to me terms. :)
Say no to knives? But, but, what if you meed to cut string? Or open packages? Or cut the strapping tape on that fresh box of printer paper? I have carried a small knife everywhere with me ever since my seventh birthday, when my dad said I was old enough to have a penknife and took me to pick one. And yes, I HAVE nearly been arrested on several occasions for having one (a small, 2 1/2" blade lockknife made by Whitby - it is excellent BTW, holds an edge you can, literally, shave with). However, I don't really want to stab anyone with it...
i don't know...i think this might actually work. of course then there'll probably just be a huge rise in spork-crime.
this is relevant to me in the convict colonies. recently, it appears, federally, and state-wise, it has become illegal to carry any kind of knife, in a public place. it appears there is no conditions to this but i don't hear about any questions about people buying kitchen knives and pocket knives from shops. in theory, anyone buying a knife from a shop, of any kind, could theoretically be arrested. nobody talks about this of course.
so, in other words, if the police decide that you are a bad guy, for whatever reason, they will be able to increase your penalty, whatever it may be, by finding a victorinox folding knife or, worse, a leatherman, in your possession, they can slap you for an extra fine (i think it's about 500 aud). i think, theoretically they can trump your charges to much more nasty ones like attempted murder, on this basis.
never mind the fact that the majority of devices on your average swiss army knife or leatherman is actual *tools*, are not knives, and that they are physically, nearly useless as weapons in a hand to hand combat situation.
since i recently unfortunately got caught in the legal web, i sat in on a bunch of minor legal cases, and i saw a case where the possession of a knife, which was, according to the testimony of the accused, in the possession of the accused due to taking said blade away from a person who was interested in committing suicide... and then, this poor woman got into more trouble due to this stupid recently introduced law, on top of a simple domestic complaint, in other words, because an ex boyfriend started harranguing her in a public place, and she didn't just run away...
it's very disturbing. where do you draw lines on such a law? possession of a sharp implement in public??? who defines what that means, who defines what is legitimate and what is 'illegal'?
How about a million knife wielders scratching "No to flash" in their own blood.
Flash and WWW are 2 different and incompatible things, because one is proprietary and undocumented owned by one singe company, while the other is based on open standards, and owned by everyone.
That by itself summarize everything.
Maybe they should get help with their terms and conditions page from those fine folks at Dozier Internet Law, P.C.?
Maybe it was because I saw the AT&T post before this one, but the street-scene on this site reminds me of the dystopia in V for Vendetta. An empty street at night with the same propaganda posters all over the walls and a conspicuous CCTV camera.
I also like how the sign on the bus-shelter is branded by Clear-Channel.
Any Barristers around to tell us how much of this is viable under English or EU law?
This website needs a coding hobo, not a stabbing hobo. Its something these nobos wouldn't understand.
Nice, the accessibility page says "Coming soon" - I've fired off a note to contact@ntk.org.uk to ask when. I thought I'd learn more about the state of accessibility in the UK from http://www.bcodp.org.uk/ but the 1st link I followed was to a MS Word document! ( Their Manifesto )
This was a job for CRACK STUNTMAN.
See http://www.homestarrunner.com/2manyknives.html
I don't understand why you can't access the page. http://www.ntk.org.uk/ The page is crap, but it is flash and everyone has flash player nowadays.
My head hurts... So based on their Terms and conditions page ( at http://ww.ntk.org.uk/terms.html ) I can't reference where my comment about their Terms and conditions page comes from, in a comment on Boing Boing ( a site I don't own ), because they say "You must not establish a link from any website that is not owned by you."
So if I do then they think that "The English courts will have non-exclusive jurisdiction over any claim arising from, or related to, a visit to our website although we retain the right to bring proceedings against you for breach of these conditions in your country of residence or any other relevant country."
(OK, so I wimped out and removed the first w in www...)
I can see the Royal Armouries from my office window here and one whole side of the building is a huge glass stairwell with several thousand knives/swords/daggers etc on display.
Seems somewhat ironic that they're the ones running a 'No to Knives' campaign.
(N.B. If you're ever in the area - maybe for BarCamp Leeds for example - the Armouries is actually a great place to visit, despite the ridiculous campaign/website)
I look forward to awesome btard type graffiti on the "Pledge Wall" asap!
And here I thought it was all a ruse by those pranksters at the other British NTK... Funny coincidence, that.
@JUSTIN(PUSHA) -- Accessibility means maximising the number of people who can use your website, including the disabled. I think the first people you should target for a "no to knives" pledge are people who can't see very well.
@TOBY -- I couldn't possibly comment.
*sigh*
The ease of use in the Flash IDE is a pro and a con. Con because we get people like this who make horrific sites with it.
At the very least, the sections should be deep linked using any of the various methods available.
Any flash dev worth anything should know how to do that (who still makes sites all flash anyhow?).