Re: [ga] Re: Free speech and GA

[Weisberg <weisberg@texoma.net>]

This is Joe Baptista posing as Weisberg - yada yada yada.

On Sat, 1 Jan 2000, Weisberg wrote:

> I agree with most of Michael's points.   However, the misbehavior
> cited has not actually affected our ability to discuss whatever we
> want.  My/your posts have been read and our points have received the
> critical review they deserved.  Our filters work fine.  Whatever
> gets past them still ends up in the trash.

I have no problem with personal filters.

> An over-reaction, on the other hand, can lead us into an
> unproductive swamp.  Indeed, I suspect that is the actual intent of
> whoever is behind the offending posts.  Clearly, he/they are not

No - it is not.  My only intention, and those who pay attention are by now
well aware that I am protesting any form of censorship in the GA.  Don't
take advantage of my being unable to post here as an opportunity to speak
on my behalf.  That is clearly wrong.

> doing anything for our (nor, indeed, his/their) civil rights.
> Rather, he/they are pushing us into accepting straight jackets and
> loss of rights for the "civil" majority in the hope of curbing
> his/their "uncivil" behavior.  And, there is no assurance that

There is nothing uncivil in my behaviour.  Children being fucked by
politicians or lawyers is uncivil.  Wars are uncivil.  And censorship and
the loss of free speeech and expression in society is uncivil.

As for any loss of rights - that has already happened here with
censorship.  Do you feel that rights and freedoms can be parceled into
pieces or degrees of rights parcelled out to those who desearve.

I think your in need of an education in civil liberties.

> his/their game will end with the first level of restriction we place
> upon ourselves.   They/he will taunt and distract us as long as we
> chase him/them.

Correct.  As I have said - censorship is a dogs breakfast, so feel free to
start on dinner.

> I invoke "Dave Crocker's First Rule"--shun whomever you think is an
> impostor or abuser.  Don't comment on behavior nor inanity.  Lets
> keep our eyes on the prize, discussing the substantive issues before
> us instead of who is who, what should be allowed, or who excluded.

Yes - and the prize is - let's give the internet to IBM.

Good luck.

Regards
Joe Baptista

> 
> 
> Michael wrote:
> 
> >
> > 1/1/00
> >     Friends:
> >
> >         I long to participate in a forum where I can debate the
> > need for unlimited gTLDs.
> 
>