Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!swbatl!texbell!texsun!csccat!larry
From: larry@csccat.UUCP (Larry Spence)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: UltraScript PC with 640K
Message-ID: <3600@csccat.UUCP>
Date: 6 Mar 90 01:21:49 GMT
References: <9477@imagen.UUCP>
Reply-To: larry@csccat.UUCP (Larry Spence)
Organization: Computer Support Corporation. Dallas,Texas
Lines: 107

In article <9477@imagen.UUCP> ib@apolling (Ivan N. Bach) writes:
>I would love to answer your questions about USPC.  If we lived in a free
>society, I would no doubt be able to do that.  You seem to have the illusion 
>that this is a free-access network.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

Awww, c'mon, quit whining.  I'm sure that plenty of people will stand up
for your right to post if it's really threatened, including me. 

>This network is being administered by at least five self-appointed Ministers.
>Their names are:
>  ... list of names ...
>
>You have already broken several of their rules by posting your questions 
>directly to this newsgroup.  The proper procedure is to prepare a draft for 
>your posting in five copies, and send it for approval to the Ministry of the 
>USENET Network in Beaverton, Oregon.  They will decide whether your posting 
>is "crap."  This is the term the Honorable Don Hopkins used when he referred 
>to one of my recent postings.

Is someone actually keeping you from posting something?  Are you being 
PREVENTED from posting?  Until then, quit whining.

>judges, have imposed a gag order on my postings, and they have put my e-mail
>address into their "kill" files, so that all my future postings will be auto-
>matically eliminated. 

You have a right to post what you want, we have a right to not look at it.
Do you have a problem with that, and if so, why?

>If I were you, I would think three times before posting any articles to this
>newsgroup. 

This is too much.  Let the guy post and draw his own conclusions about this
newsgroup.  However, I support your right to post your pathetic whining, as 
long as you support my right to warn this person about your warnings!

>    1. I was threatened by a libel suit.

If you don't feel that you've libelled anyone, why should you worry about this?

>    2. I was publicly called all kinds of names (a "wannabe," an "embarrassment
>       to my employer," "Anti-Adobe," etc.), and then one of the Ministers
>       told me that I could respond to these offensive postings only by private 
>       e-mail that nobody else would ever see.

No one can force you to do this without some serious evidence, and I think 
you know that.  

>    3. My technical comments were called "bashing and haranguing."  I was told 
>       that my postings "belittled myself and demeaned the company for which
>       I work."  

I don't tar QMS with the same brush, since there's no way they could possibly
have seen and approved of your postings.  My impression of your employer has
been and continues to be positive.

>    5. Several attempts were made to misinterpret my personal comments as the
>       comments of my employer.

Well, your employer is a potential competitor of Adobe, and many of your
points seemed to criticize things that PS lacks... it's an easy conclusion
to come to.  

>    7. Minister Don Hopkins threatened to notify the PostMaster in my area
>       if I post any more "crap." 

If his complaints are spurious, you have nothing to worry about, right?  Just
keep copies of the postings and email around for reference.

>    8. One of the Ministers posted instructions on how to put my e-mail address
>       into a kill file.

So what?!?  Do you think that we're a bunch of robots who will read that and
automatically put you in the kill file?  Even without a kill file entry, all
someone has to do is hit "n."  So what's the big deal?

>At the same time, the five Ministers enjoy the priviledge of posting any "crap"
>they want.

Their rights are exactly the same as yours.  Let us know when someone stops
you from posting.  Send me email, and I'll post it to this newsgroup.

>When you post something to this group, never include your business address, 
>because you will expose yourself and your employer to all kinds of abuse.

What is the purpose of including your address, if not to give people a route
by which to respond?  If you can't stand the heat...

>I don't know about you, but from now on I will post my articles only to the
>newsgroup comp.newprod.  Even that may not be safe.

Coward!  Keep posting here!  I don't like your postings, but don't pull some
martyr-complex act on us.  You make bold statements, then act hurt when you
get similarly bold replies.  I've never heard of a case where someone was
prevented from posting unless they were using obscene insults, or suggesting
something illegal.  Keep the technical content high and the emotional content
low, and I don't think you'll have any problems you can't handle.

Apologies for using so much bandwidth on this, but when you started spewing
your warnings about the supposed horrors of this newsgroup, it really ticked
me off.  The content of this newsgroup could be better, but I don't think
that the problem is censorship.  

-- 
Larry Spence
larry@csccat
...{texbell,texsun}!csccat!larry