Xref: utzoo news.groups:18309 alt.config:1523 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!shelby!apple!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!shire!okunewck From: okunewck@shire.cs.psu.edu (Phil OKunewick) Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.config Subject: Re: Various topics Message-ID: Date: 2 Mar 90 21:41:01 GMT References: <31@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> <449@dbase.A-T.COM> Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet) Organization: Random, at best Lines: 27 In article <449@dbase.A-T.COM> dveditz@dbase.A-T.COM (Dan Veditz) writes: >What's the point of a free-speech hierarchy if there's a potential >censor in charge of each group? Hi. Would you care to provide us a list of moderators who are warping the discussion, by censoring articles that disagree with ther views? I'm having a hard time finding any. (Clue: A censor feels that truth is bad. A moderator feels that irrelevant drivel is bad. There's a slight difference there.) If you post something in rec.humor, I'm not going to read it. Not that it isn't funny; I just don't feel like wading through the 95% crud to find the 5% humor (it *is* rec.humor, y'know). If you mail it to Brad and it's actually funny, I will see it. Brad is a (*gasp!*) moderator. But because of him, I'm more likely to hear what you have to say. Can this "censorship" actually be enhancing your freedom of speech? Do you still want to post drivel? You can still do it! Try alt.stupidity, alt.flame, rec.humor, alt.rissa... Now: Do you still feel that you are being censored by these moderators? If so, then why do you want to infringe on *MY* right to read things that interest me, by cluttering my favorite newsgroups with trash? -- ---Phil (This is yet another self-referential .signature .)