Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sun-barr!texsun!pollux!ti-csl!m2!holland
From: holland@m2.csc.ti.com (Fred Hollander)
Newsgroups: gnu.gcc
Subject: Re: (none)
Message-ID: <81447@ti-csl.csc.ti.com>
Date: 18 Jun 89 16:32:00 GMT
References: <8906170205.AA00659@sugar-bombs.ai.mit.edu>
Sender: news@ti-csl.csc.ti.com
Reply-To: holland@m2.UUCP (Fred Hollander)
Distribution: gnu
Organization: TI Computer Science Center, Dallas
Lines: 75

In article <8906170205.AA00659@sugar-bombs.ai.mit.edu> rms@AI.MIT.EDU writes:
>
>    What if some postmaster told you that you could no longer send or
>    receive mail because he didn't think he should "cooperate" with FSF.
>
>That would be obnoxious; however, it is not like anything I have considered
>doing.  In fact, it is quite beyond my powers.

It would be obnoxious and it is just like what you have done.  You seem to
think you have that power within this newsgroup.

>To make a better analogy: the Republican National Committee can send
>US mail to anyone, but they can't send US mail to all the people in my
>address list.  Since I don't agree with their goals, I won't give them
>the list.  But there is no person who is prevented by this from
>exchanging letters with the Republican National Committee.  No one is
>having his "mail censored".

That analogy is worse.  If your mailing list was via US mail, you would be
paying the bill.  In this network, you don't pay the postage!  You don't
have the authority to regulate the traffic in this network.  Your use of
this netowrk is a priveledge afforded to you (and all of us) by the
generosity of the many mail gateways that do not charge us for the service
they provide.  Your presumption that you, as a guest of this network, can
dictate your own self-serving regulations on the rest of us is truly
obnoxious.

>    You and many others are certainly not interested in Berry's news but,
>    there may be some that are.  They have a right to receive his news.
>
>If the New York Times declines to publish something of interest to
>you, is that violating your rights?  If Zeta magazine refuses to
>publish articles by conservatives, is that violating the rights of
>would-be conservative readers?  I don't think so.  Likewise, if
>we decline to lend info-gcc to Berry's purposes, that violates no
>rights of yours.  You can still communicate with Berry if you wish.

Again, if this were a publication that you sponsored, I might agree
with your right to regulate the contents.  You are guest, just like
the rest of us.  Please behave accordingly.

Also, it is ironic that Berry's article probably would have gone unnoticed
by many and only read by those who were interested in gcc on A/UX.  You
have chosen to give this issue a tremendous amount of visibility.  I also
believe that you have lost a great deal of credibility and support with
your demonstrations of fanatics and your obnoxious and irrational statements.
Just to name a few:

	- You justified a comparison of your cause with those who protested
	(and died) in Tienamen Square.

	- You proposed violence in the form of destruction of Macintoshes
	(give a Mac the axe)

	- You requested that all those who disagreed with you should write
	to you.  "Even though I know you're wrong, I just want to know how
	many of you there are."

	- You deny some groups their constitutional rights because they are
	"agressors" and don't deserve them.

	- You so rudely responded to supporters of GNU who are concerned
	about the legalities of using GNU.  "I won't take you to court.
	I can't even afford it."

Why don't you drop this attitude that everything you do is right because
you are fighting for such a righteous cause and anyone that stands in your
way is a public enemy without any rights.

Fred Hollander
Computer Science Center
Texas Instruments, Inc.
hollander@ti.com

The above statements are my own and not representative of Texas Instruments.