dmjones@bloom-beacon.UUCP (11/12/87)
Sorry to post two articles about the same topic in one day, but I just found the following in misc.legal. I also just found out that that Eric Mading has had his accounts pulled, and I anticipate a violent flurry of articles about fascists on the net who try to silence anyone with opposing views. (Excuse me while I try to jump out of the way. :-) This will be my last posting on the topic. If anyone wants to justify my paranoia, please do so via e-mail. In article <1351@codas.att.com> dlm@codas.att.com (Don_L_Million) writes: >> Flood the system managers at puff with e-mail and try to >> make them realize that just putting /mading@puff/h:j in >> our kill files is not enough. > >Eric Mading's anti-jewish statements demonstrate an incredible ignorance, >and a potentially dangerous lack of tolerance. The people who advocate >barring Eric from the net because of his opinions are demonstrating as >much ignorance, and as much lack of tolerance. Please go back and read my original article (copies available on receipt of a usable address if it has expired on your system). I never once mentioned having Eric kicked off the net. I did, however, advocate having someone, preferably a sysadmin, suggest that Eric assume a little more responsibility in his actions, especially in the area of thinking before posting. Why did I mention sysadmins in particular? Reread the first part of my posting. I thought that there was at least a small possibility that a real abuse of the system was taking place. It seems to me that a sysadmin would be in the best position to investigate that. Ironically, I seem to have been somewhat guilty of the same crime I have accused Eric of. I didn't anticipate that my suggestion would be interpreted as a call to arms to have Eric Mading thrown off of the net. My main consolation here is that I don't think anyone could claim that I am solely responsible for what happened. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David M. Jones (ESGGM) | "Here, pounded by the surf, my Real_Network: dmjones@athena.mit.edu | corpse still lies, carried up and Fake_Net: ...!mit-eddie!mit-athena!dmjones | down on the heaving swell of the USmail: 3 Ames Street; Cambridge, MA 02139 | sea, unburied and unmourned." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ken@nsc.UUCP (11/17/87)
in article <333@ndcheg.UUCP>, evan@ndcheg.UUCP (Evan Bauman) says: *>Now I believe in free speech as much as anyone else, but using someone else's *>computer to promote your own warped ideas is not a protected right. If Mading *>is serious about continuing to annoy the net, let him buy his own UNIX box *>and get a feed for himself. > Evan Bauman It would seem obvious that you believe in free speach as long as the views expressed are not to different from yours. The concepts of warped, annoy, or protected rights are subject to the interpretation of the person reading the article. I am not trying to stand in defense of what eric said only the right to express his/your views. Many people have been persecuted due to the views they helded being unpopular at the time. It may be necessary to wade through thousands of lines of trash to find the one true gem but that gem may never have been expressed if censorship was allowed to rule the net. This is supposed to be an information exchange and if we muzzle the radicals and the radical views we will be uninformed when/if it becomes necessary to resist them and their kind. Silencing the opposition does not destroy them it just drives them to find other more devious ways to expound their beliefs. Don't drive them into hiding, force them into the open where all may see the danger in there ideals. {G*D, but I love a soap box} -- PATH= Second star to the right, {...Ken Trant...} and straight on till morning "Official Sponsor, US Olympic Team" {...Merrill Lynch Realty...} 415-651-3131 *:-) 408-721-8158