Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!texbell!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION.scat: sci.psycoloquy.moderated Keywords: psychology, scholrly-discussion, Bitnet-Psychology-Newsletter Message-ID: Date: 22 Jan 90 18:06:37 GMT References: <13106@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <1990Jan21.072353.17735@agate.berkeley.edu> <13144@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <1990Jan22.095847.15384@agate.berkeley.edu> Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 46 Is it my imagination or do these two paragraphs say the same thing? > >I rightly surmised at the time that someone may have been using an > >account illicitly at Berkeley for those postings, and the sysadmin > >confirmed it, saying the real poster was not the name that > >appeared on the login; he had previously had his posting privileges > >revoked and was using someone else's userid. > This is incorrect. He was using the student account (with > permission of that person, but not of the department) of someone > who had graduated. This implies, to me at least, that he had lost his account and was (unless the rules have changed since I was there in 1980 or so) illicitly using someone else's account. I've got into minor trouble for doing that myself, back when Cory was an 11/70. However I remain in agreement on Gene's conclusion: > It was and remains an attack on free speech. At the least it was extreme overkill. Back to the point: > I take it your position is that you my do so with impunity, but > if someone else does, ... His position seems to be that there is a time and place for such things, and that the net is neither. > My point is not that it would be awful if shit-fuck-piss is > disallowed, my point is that your judgement has historically been > so poor that you do not seem to me to be a suitable choice as > moderator. It's a bit late for that... he is the moderator of the mailing list in question. The only question is whether a mailing list that he moderates should be gatewayed to Usenet. And if so, where? > I will add that anyone who thinks "psycoloquy" and > "scholarly Skywriting" is good style has a bad ear for language, > even when the language isn't bad language. I find both terms interesting and evocative, and wonder at the sanity of someone who doesn't. (:->, for the second part) -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. . / \ \_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'