Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!gatech!hao!woods
From: woods@hao.UCAR.EDU (Greg Woods)
Newsgroups: soc.women,news.admin
Subject: Re: I ain't afraid of no Batwoman
Message-ID: <864@hao.UCAR.EDU>
Date: Wed, 31-Dec-69 18:59:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: hao.864
Posted: Wed Dec 31 18:59:59 1969
Date-Received: Thu, 27-Aug-87 00:52:08 EDT
References: <2073@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <0@novax.nowhere.nodom> <7215@alice.UUCP> <6077@sri-unix.ARPA> <863@hao.UCAR.EDU> <1442@epimass.EPI.COM>
Reply-To: woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods)
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 37
Keywords: censorship silencing
Xref: mnetor soc.women:6619 news.admin:899

In article <1442@epimass.EPI.COM> jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck) writes:
>Action (extremely severe action) should be taken against anyone
>implementing Mr. Nobody's suggestion (what he suggested was a
>mechanism for preventing Cheryl from posting to the net at all, and
>he was specific as to how to do it).  He did more than express an
>opinion; he gave specific instructions for a form of net sabotage.
>As a backbone admin, Greg, I think you should be more pissed off
>about this than you seem to be.  Especially when you stop to think
>that a different name could be used instead.  Instead, you equate
>his offensiveness with that of Cheryl.

  The fact that Cheryl was the target is irrelevant. I simply make a
distinction between saying something and doing it. I do not approve
of the contents of Mr. Nobody's posting, especially since I'm against
anonymous postings in general, but I think it opens an even bigger can of 
worms if we try to censor him. I agree with you that anyone who actually
DOES what he suggests should be disiplined, for then THEY are committing
censorship of the worst kind. I equate this to the magazines that wanted to
publish instructions on how to build an atom bomb. No, we don't want
people building atom bombs in their garages, but do we really want to
get into censorship to prevent it? Do the ends justify the means? I
personally do not think so. Particularly since it sets a very bad precedent.
  What I was trying to point out is that Valerie is suggesting that we
do exactly what she is protesting against, i.e. kick someone off the net
because of the contents of his postings. It's tantamount to saying "It's
OK to censor someone I disagree with or someone whose articles are offensive".
I know what Joe and Valerie are trying to say, and I sympathize despite my
feelings about Cheryl, but we have to be realistic and look at the whole
picture here. If we don't like what he posted, let's do what is always
done and flame the hell out of him, but let's NOT suggest that he be kicked
off the net just because we find his article offensive.

--Greg
-- 
UUCP: {hplabs, seismo, nbires, noao}!hao!woods
CSNET: woods@ncar.csnet  ARPA: woods%ncar@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
INTERNET: woods@hao.ucar.edu