Re: [ga] Re: [admin] Attacks and offensive words
>I agree with Eric on this. Stifling debate is a big part of what you do
>you want to shut out the people from having a say in the decision making
>process. You are wrong to criticize Eric for his post - he was making a
>valid, on-topic post. As for calling names, "if the shoe fits...". Also,
>some strong language sometimes serves to wake folks up and get their
Your post would be entirely appropriate if we were discussing the way to set
up rules of behaviour.
This is not the case now: rules have been discussed, voted, approved, and we
are now in the enforcement phase.
If I may use an example, smoking is now forbidden on aircrafts. You may
argue whether this is censoring your rights to smoke, or if this is needed
to protect the rights of others not to inhale your smoke, but the fact is
that if you are caught smoking you are fined.
Exactly this is happening to who violates the posting rules in quantity
(number of posts) or quality (civil discourse).
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html