Xref: utzoo gnu.misc.discuss:1252 comp.sources.d:5651
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!uunet!shelby!bu.edu!snorkelwacker!spdcc!ima!haddock!ico!rcd
From: rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: The Official Word on Citations in FSF Works
Summary: word games
Message-ID: <1990Jul18.211712.27198@ico.isc.com>
Date: 18 Jul 90 21:17:12 GMT
References: <1990Jul3.111026.19698@twinsun.com> <3014@skye.ed.ac.uk> <1990Jul18.145521.11726@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Organization: Interactive Systems Corporation, Boulder, CO
Lines: 23

gsh7w@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg S. Hennessy) writes:
  thor@stout.atd.ucar.edu (Rich Neitzel) writes:
> #If I recall correctly, the book was cited in the original draft.
> #Therefore removing it is indeed censorship. 

> No, removing the reference is editing.

Censorship is a type of editing.  Specifically, it is editing to remove
that which is in some way--esp. morally--objectionable (as contrasted with
things removed because they are irrelevant, incorrect, etc.).  According
to the earlier posting, the citation was obviously removed because it was
found to be objectionable by FSF standards.

If the act of removing the citation causes me x amount of bother, I am
bothered at least 3x by the various attempts to explain away the act.

>...Please learn the difference
> between censorship and editing.

If you would teach, first know.
-- 
Dick Dunn     rcd@ico.isc.com  -or-  ico!rcd          (303)449-2870
   ...Programs, not politics.