Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!steinmetz!ge-dab!codas!killer!wnp
From: wnp@killer.UUCP (Wolf Paul)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: please moderate moderately -> comp.binaries.ibm.pc
Message-ID: <2557@killer.UUCP>
Date: 23 Dec 87 21:38:10 GMT
References: <341@spl1.UUCP> <9132@sgi.SGI.COM> <377@apr.UUCP> <755@ur-tut.UUCP>
Reply-To: wnp@killer.UUCP (Wolf Paul)
Distribution: na
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection BBS, Dallas, Tx
Lines: 23
Keywords: comp.binaries.ibm.pc, moderated

In article <755@ur-tut.UUCP> akk2@tut.cc.rochester.edu.UUCP writes:
>I am pleased that there is someone who is volunteering to moderate
>the binaries newsgroups, but like gsk@khaki, I do not agree with 
>the editorial policies that will be put in place.  As with anything
>else that one obtains from electronic networks, the responsibility
>of the network or their representatives is limited to seeing that
>only PD/shareware/freeware programs get distributed.  The network 
>should not be held responsible for things like Trojan horses.  The
>responsibility for that lies solely with the user.  If I am dumb
>enough to run a program I obtain through the net on a machine that
>has a hard disk which has not been backed up, and the program turns

Yes, but should you decide to sue the moderator, who's to know that the
jury will follow this wise reasoning? We're now in a situation where 
a manufacturer has to list not only the uses for which his product is
designed but also all the uses for which it is not designed, warning people
not to put said product to said uses - else he might be held liable if
someone gets hurt. With juries like these it pays to be extra careful.
I don't like Harry Skelton's policies, but I support them, because we
live in a society that's gone liability-crazy.

Wolf Paul
ihnp4!killer!dcs!wnp