Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!axion!uzi-9mm.fulcrum.bt.co.uk!igb
From: igb@fulcrum.bt.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Fooling the censors
Message-ID: <|RH&^5=@uzi-9mm.fulcrum.bt.co.uk>
Date: 13 Mar 91 13:02:19 GMT
References: <532@iczer-1.UUCP> <CNH5730.91Mar7100654@maraba.tamu.edu> <1991Mar13.033143.29172@ddsw1.MCS.COM>
Sender: news@fulcrum.bt.co.uk (News with an UZI)
Organization: BT Fulcrum, Birmingham
Lines: 26

In article <1991Mar13.033143.29172@ddsw1.MCS.COM> zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Sameer Parekh) writes:
>I would submit that the only reason news feeds have been able to get
>away with this so far is that no legal case has been initiated in
>which quality lawyers have been enlisted. I, for one, would be willing
>to donate to such a case if a lawyer like William Kunstler were
>retained.

There really are some very stupid people around.  If you instigate a
case which says ``carry all news groups or carry none or I'll see you in
court'', I expect that you would have a network for about twelve hours.

I wish people who don't have to justify news to management would keep
their ill-informed opinions to themselves.  If I feed someone some
fraction of the news, they have an easy solution --- get the balance
from someone else.  Or get it all from them.  I don't care.  

I gain nothing from giving out feeds bar a feeling of doing something
generous.  The company couldn't care less.  If people say ``don't feed
me as I can get a more politically correct feed from someone else'' I'm
hardly going to argue.  Nor, I suspect, is any other admin aside from
the pay-for-play ones.

I feel lusers trumpeting their ``right'' to news are rather killing the
goose that lays the golden eggs.

ian