Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!usc!apple!sun-barr!ccut!wnoc-tyo-news!dclsic!sjc!spider!leia!harkcom From: harkcom@potato.pa.Yokogawa.CO.JP (Alton Harkcom) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: The Official Word on Citations in FSF Works Message-ID: Date: 20 Jul 90 12:51:49 GMT References: <3014@skye.ed.ac.uk> <1990Jul18.145521.11726@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1990Jul18.211712.27198@ico.isc.com> <1990Jul19.004300.19165@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> Sender: news@leia.pa.yokogawa.co.jp Organization: Yokogawa Electric Corporation, Tokyo, Japan. Lines: 20 In-reply-to: gsh7w@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU's message of 19 Jul 90 00:43:00 GMT In article <1990Jul19.004300.19165@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gsh7w@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg S. Hennessy) writes: =}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. If I write the word 'f*ck' in this manner then I have censored it. If I write it in its entirity and then change it to 'f*ck' then I have edited and censored it (due to my reasons for writing that way being objective). You are still free to write it in its entirity, but that does not change the fact that I censored it... PS: That editor better censor those cuss words or the FCC may remove a few of his rights. -- --harkcom@potato.pa.yokogawa.co.jp