Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site qubix.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!decvax!decwrl!sun!qubix!steven From: steven@qubix.UUCP (Steven Maurer) Newsgroups: net.followup Subject: Re: On unc!tim: You don't *know* that! Message-ID: <1129@qubix.UUCP> Date: Wed, 23-May-84 11:28:31 EDT Article-I.D.: qubix.1129 Posted: Wed May 23 11:28:31 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 30-May-84 09:28:13 EDT References: <600@osu-dbs.UUCP> Organization: Qubix Graphic Systems, Saratoga, CA Lines: 71 [I defend my right to make dumb little throw-away lines] >> Folks, no one discussing Tim's situation here on the net knows one thing >> about the case. Consider what we have seen in the case so far: we have >> seen the defendant's claim to innocence. Since so many people have brought >> up the suggestion that UNC be taken to court for violation of free speech >> rights, tell me who would accept such a totally one-sided argument in a >> court of law? What Tim posted was hardly a "biased opinion" but rather a series of semi-official corrispondence between himself and the CS faculty at UNC. BY this alone we are left to judge the case (in our kangaroo court), and by this alone it does appear that the CS UNC faculty are generally "close-minded SOB"'s. >> Based on the necessarily heavily- >> biased account of Tim, you come to the conclusion that Dr Brooks is a close- >> minded SOB. How DARE you? How much do you know about Dr Brooks? Nothing >> whatsoever of significance. What have you seen of him so far is an exchange >> of mail between himself and one other party. That's all. How can you claim >> such vast knowledge of his mind from that tiny bit of evidence? No doubt a murderer is not truly EVIL, however I am quite willing to condemn him on that "tiny but of evidence" which I have. Of course murder is not censorship, but the similarities exist. >> The bottom line in all of this is that *we don't know*. The bottom line in all of this is that *YOU WON'T infer from a reasonable (in fact very lengthy) amount of evidence*. >> Nonsense again! We have laws in this country which penalize indi- >> viduals for their abuses of others' rights. This is, in effect, what >> UNC did. Whether they were just in doing so is still up in the air. (This preceeding paragraph should easily take the award for fascist statement of the year) The obvious response: AND WHAT "OTHER'S RIGHT", PRAY TELL, DID TIM ABUSE????? Being able to speak your mind, in this country, is defined as NOT abusing anyones rights. In fact, it itself is a right. Tim was obviously being censored, at a public institution. He was not being censored for writing down swear words, he was censored for holding opinions with which the professors did not agree. This is immoral, if not illegal, since the CS Faculty at UNC is NOT being paid tax money to censor, but rather to spread knowledge. It is the basic premise of all fascist states, that communication can some how "harm" other individuals. All it REALLY does is give "right thinking" people, a chance to hear from another perspective. If you find another's opinions "offensive", you can just tell your side of it (which I am doing right now), and let the readers decide. I only deplore Tim's posting and quitting, instead of taking the case to the ACLU, who, no doubt, would have had a field day with it. No, I don't absolutly *KNOW* who would win, but certainly it would reveal something rotten in the state of North Carolina. Steven Maurer "Real Men get their messages posted!!"