Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!cok
From: COK@PSUVMA.BITNET (R. W. Clark, K. S. C.)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.sysadmin,alt.flame
Subject: Defending Eric Mading
Message-ID: <25001COK@PSUVMA>
Date: Thu, 12-Nov-87 19:35:33 EST
Article-I.D.: PSUVMA.25001COK
Posted: Thu Nov 12 19:35:33 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Nov-87 09:00:26 EST
Organization: The Pennsylvania State University - Computation Center
Lines: 42
Xref: mnetor news.admin:1373 news.sysadmin:448 alt.flame:555

I think anyone who's been reading this group for any length of time knows
that while Eric was on the net I was one of his more vocal opponents.  However,
I cannot condone the removal of his accounts because of his postings.
     
I think that Eric DESERVED to have his accounts removed, but I do not think
that we had the right to cause them to be removed.
     
The reason I am opposed to this action is not because it is censorship.
The term "censorship" is irrelevant on the net; the net is pretty much a
privately funded institution; those who control the net control what is
allowed on the net.  However, I noticed that the shutup of Eric Mading was
very quiet.  We would not even have heard about it if the person responsible
for his removal did not post this to the net.  Generally, the alt newsgroups
are known for the freedom of speech in them.  I think that if Eric can be
removed for what he says, many of us are also so endangered.
     
For example, if someone were to forward Russell Turpin's article on "The
despicability of drug cops" to his sysadmin, this sysadmin might find it
offensive and have his account removed.  It does certainly SEEM to advocate
cop-killing.  I know that it does not in fact condone any such thing, but
preceded by a convincing enough cover letter, this could be portrayed to his
detriment.  In fact, many of the articles people have written about
Eric could be construed as offensive.  They would not stand up as evidence
in a libel suit, but they would not have to.  All they would have to do is
convince a sysadmin that the writer deserved removal for saying such a thing.
     
We are NOT protected by the First Amendment here.  I would be VERY careful in
setting a precedent of this sort.  You, or I, could be the next so silenced.
     
Think about it.
     
     
I would appreciate it if someone would email me the address of this sysadmin
at puff.  I will forward this article to him.
-------
BITNET: cok%psuvma@psuvax1.uucp.bitnet  "'I'll be judge, I'll be jury,' said
|^^^^^^|cok%psuvma.bitnet@psuvax1.uucp  cunning old Fury; 'I'll try the whole
|fnord |cok%psuvma@psuvax1.psu.edu        cause and condemn you to death.'"
|fnord |(and many other foul addresses      Lewis Carroll
|______|better left unmentioned)                            The Mad Arab