Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!nsc!chuqui
From: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: HOW TO DEAL WITH A JERK
Message-ID: <3191@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 29-Sep-85 11:50:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.3191
Posted: Sun Sep 29 11:50:03 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 30-Sep-85 02:29:35 EDT
References: <1170@mhuxt.UUCP> <4410@amdcad.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Organization: Ninja Ewok Training Grounds
Lines: 64

In article <4410@amdcad.UUCP> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes:
>If my memory serves me correctly, Chuqui has already tried to get a DEC
>employee fired (or censored). At one time, he wrote to DEC to try to get
>Ken Arndt silenced. He had some success too, I believe.

Well, for the record: at one time I DID make an official complaint about
the postings of John Williams. My hope was to get the drivel stopped, and
it (more or less) has. There was NEVER an attempt to get anyone fired, as
phil is negligently claiming. I don't happen to consider it censorship
because censorship implies the inhibition of ideas, and the stuff Williams
was posting at that time was devoid of any. Also, for the record: compared
to the trash being posted by Don Black, John Williams is rather harmless.

Let me, while I'm at it, bring up a point of logic. The main defense of
Black's postings has been under 'freedom of {speech|press}' with the
comment that if I didn't like it, ignore it. Let me point out that I've
already gone on record in this forum that I don't agree with that
viewpoint, so continuing to badger me with it won't do a lot of good in
changing my mind unless you have a strong argument behind it. Given that
view of the net, I don't see any problem with the attempts to get Black to
stop posting that drivel.

However, those people who DO believe that freedom of speech or press
applies, let me remind you of a little paradox that has shown up. The
general arguement I've seen has been of the form 'he DOES have the write to
post it, just don't read it, and {you or laurie} don't have the right to
suggest company boycotts (or lynching, or whatever...)

Now think about that. Don has the 'right' to make his postings, and we're
simply to ignore it. Fine, if we choose NOT to ignore it, we also have the
'right' to post our comments as well, with the same proviso that you ignore
those. If you give Don Black the right to post to the net with his racist
comments, you must also give Laurie the right to post to the net denouncing
those racist comments and suggesting economic boycott. If you don't like
it, ignore it, folks. The first amendment isn't context sensitive. It
either works the same for everyone or it doesn't work at all. You can't
just claim protection under it when you consider yourself downtrodden.

(oh, the wonders of our constitution -- so flexible, to powerful, so easy
to interpret incorrectly when inconvenient. It is too bad most people
forget the responsibilities of the constitution when claiming the
rights...)

In general, then, I stand as follows:
    o If you firmly believe Don Black is protected under first amendment,
    then Laurie's comments (and everyone else's) are also protected, and
    the postings are by definition appropriate. If you don't like it,
    folks, ignore it. If you can't ignore it, you'll have to figure out
    what to do... I don't see that the first amendment applies, however,
    so you're wrong anyway.

    o If you don't believe that Black is protected under the first
    amendment, then Laurie is justified in trying to get someone posting
    inappropriate trash off the net. Economic boycott may be a bit strong,
    but only if you worry that she carries enough power to pull it off.
    Voting with the pocketbook is the age old form of getting your point
    across. 


-- 
:From under the bar at Callahan's:   Chuq Von Rospach 
nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA               {decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,pyramid}!nsc!chuqui

If you can't talk below a bellow, you can't talk...


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com