Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!rex!uflorida!gatech!udel!haven!mimsy!midway!ellis.uchicago.edu!dwal
From: dwal@ellis.uchicago.edu (David Walton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Macs Suck (How to get revenge)
Message-ID: <1991Jan19.010503.14856@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 19 Jan 91 01:05:03 GMT
References: <231b3679.664240503@fergvax>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Distribution: comp
Organization: University of Chicago, Academic and Public Computing
Lines: 39

In article <231b3679.664240503@fergvax> 231b3679@fergvax.unl.edu (CS 231 section 2) writes:
>OK, folks, here's how you can do your part to get that immature user's Usenet
>priviliges revoked.  Mail a simple message to:

[Instructions on how to complain to sysadmin at oregon deleted]

Since when does being immature constitute sufficient grounds for
having one's network access cut off?

The message which Marty Willis posted lacked substance, style, and
humour.  One is tempted to draw conclusions about his character,
taste, intelligence, and way of life which would look unfavorable when
compared with, say, your average rabid gopher.  But cutting off his
usenet privileges probably gives him the most satisfaction of anything
that could be done, and makes us look like hypersensitive, power-happy
censors in the process.  How do we know it wasn't a joke, for pete's
sake?

In the recent debate on flag-burning, many people observed that the
real test of a right to free speech came when it was used to voice
opinions that were unpopular.  While this situation is clearly
different (there's no *right* to post on Usenet, for example), I'd
argue that the idea is the same: I feel extremely uncomfortable saying
that Marty shouldn't be allowed to post anything simply because one of
his messages was obnoxious and inappropriate.  Stuff which is much
more offensive than this gets slung around in other groups all the
time, and they manage to live through it.  You can vent your spleen
against him and still let him vent his.

Setting aside the larger issues (harassment, freedom of speech, etc.),
if we were simply to ignore the guy, I suspect he would go away.
That's what everybody really wants, now, isn't it?



--
David Walton            Internet: dwal@midway.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago   {  Any opinions found herein are mine, not  }
Computing Organizations {  those of my employers (or anybody else). }