Xref: utzoo gnu.misc.discuss:1255 comp.sources.d:5655
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU!gsh7w
From: gsh7w@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg S. Hennessy)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: The Official Word on Citations in FSF Works
Message-ID: <1990Jul19.004300.19165@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 19 Jul 90 00:43:00 GMT
References: <3014@skye.ed.ac.uk> <1990Jul18.145521.11726@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1990Jul18.211712.27198@ico.isc.com>
Sender: news@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
Lines: 31

Me:
#> No, removing the reference is editing.

Dick Dunn writes:
#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.).

Since you are perfectly free to write your own GAWK manual, and
include Kernighan's book as a referece, it what the FSF is doing
cannot be censorship. A newspaper reporter is not censoring if he
fails to include everything you say if you are interviewed. The editor
of a newspaper is not censoring when he edits out cuss words from the
baseball player who was tagged out at home.

I ain't saying what the FSF did was a good thing, it just ain't
censorship. 


#>...Please learn the difference
#> between censorship and editing.
#
#If you would teach, first know.

I do.

--
-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
 UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w