[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] Re: What list forwards to what list
Roberto and all Assembly members,
Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> Karl Auerbach wrote:
> >To me that intolerable garbage is e-mail that says "censorship is OK".
> >To some that intolerable garbage is e-mail that makes references to
> >But should the reaction be to gag the speaker or to individually block
> >I chose the latter approach.
> You have freedom of choice, and can choose for yourself the approach you
> wish, but cannot assume that everybody will make the same choice.
> Moreover, you cannot *impose* on everybody to choose your approach.
Very true. I hope you also realize this as well Roberto. If however you
are using this comments to Karl and all of us as justification for
than no I am afraid you are mistaken. There is NO justification for
I am sure that you know this.
> It is clear that we will not have the perfect solution that will make
> everybody happy.
> Either make unhappy the ones who do not want to participate in a list
> that enforces rules, even if only about civil discourse, or make unhappy
> those who do not want to participate in a list that allows verbal
> aggression by some subscribers to the others.
Rules that please everybody are of course not attainable. Rules that
please most of the participants and are decided by them, is.
> I understand your question of principle, but I cannot pretend I don't
> hear the reasons of the others.
I am gladly you and everybody can. This is a good thing. It should be
so. It is also a good thing that no one is disenfranchised by using rules
that are designed to dod so. I am also sure that you understand this as
> This is a common problem. Abusers are everywhere, and the current
> tendency, in our imperfect world, is to prevent abuse, or punish it, not
> to turn the head on the other side and pretend you don't see.
I note a tint of paranoia in you comment here Roberto. That is a
terrible thing and one that is or should not be a deciding factor in
making a reasonable decision. If it is, than your or anyone's decision
is unduly tainted by their paranoia. That is a very debilitating thing.
It can have some serious ramifications that are far reaching.
> Wanna make a test? Pick the public debate of your choice in the
> democratic country of your choice (in a city hall, on Capitol Hill, in a
> tribunal, wherever), drop by and start insulting people at random, best
> if women and with explicit language. Then, try to convince the
> attendees that they should close their ears rather than try to censor
> you limiting your freedom of speech.
> Let us know how it ended.
This is an interesting challenge. But it is of little relevance.
Legal and Policy Advisory Council,
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at