Re: Baptista Free speech and GA (Re: [ga] Time to put...)

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>]

This is Joe Baptista posing as Harald on behalf of free speech and anti
censorship.

Harald in the finest of american tradition I reply to you and say - you
full of crap.

This is about censorship.  This is about being the right to participate in
the GA arbitrarily and without notice.  Don't try to rewrite history.  I'm
sure IBM is pumping the big bucks for historical revisionisim - but it
don't wash anymore.

The GA Harald as I have said in prior postings is a joke.  This is not a
general assembly - this is a general audience selected for the sole
purpose of masturbating it's master IBM.  To those of you who are behind
this travesty - I say Shame.  And to those of you who would remain silent
- I say shame on you too.

And I am just one of those being censored.  What of Jeff Williams and
other interests who have been banned for no better reason then it was
convenient.

I'm sorry Harald.  I can't get into masturbating IBM the way some of you
do.  It's a shameless wet and sticky mess your all playing at.  Shame.

But look on the bright side.  You guys and gals do a good job of
pretending - but on the internet pretending is not enough.

Regards
Joe Baptista

On Sat, 1 Jan 2000, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> At 13:31 31.12.99 -0600, Weisberg wrote:
> >Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> >
> > > Michael,
> > >
> > > I agree that we should have a moderated list.
> > > The problem is the definition of a fair set of rules.
> >
> >What activities do we need to protect against and what rules are capable of
> >addressing those specific problems?
> The two issues we seem to be facing at present are:
> 
> - Claims of a single individual posting under multiple names, which has led to
>    a request for a verifiable identification of people posting here
> - Irrelevant messages, including messages that cause large amounts of debate
>    with no forward movement in any process
> 
> Added to that, we have the bashing-at-open-doors posting of a certain 
> person who, despite being able to post in his own name, chooses to use 
> others' names; the relevance of the point he's making is that we should 
> have a visible rule about who's allowed to post or not, instead of asking 
> our listadmin to both make the rules and enforce them.
> 
> The list technologies we have available are:
> 
> - Prefiltered mailing lists, which mechanically disallow certain messages
>    and let others through
> - Moderated mailing lists, which require human approval of all messages
> - Semimoderated lists, which let some messages through, but require human
>    approval for others.
> 
> In addition, we have the possibility of using cryptographic verification of 
> messages to the list; this requires that the posters have this technology 
> available.
> 
> Happy new year to everyone!
> 
>                             Harald A
>                 (insomniac in the year 2000)
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no
> 
>