pugsly@isrnix.UUCP (David A. Roth) (12/25/85)
Some lawyer...sheeesh! David A. Roth ...decvax!pur-ee!isrnix!pugsly ...ihnp4!inuxc!isrnix!pugsly Indianapolis,IN
root@sigma.UUCP () (12/27/85)
Organization: I keep receiving replies about my postings. The more astute among you realized that these postings are from the "inside", from somebody entangled in the system, while the thoughtless and lazy only complained about my anonymity. Some even went so far as to say that they wouldn't even bother reading any more unless I gave my name. Because I fear retaliation from the case worker, I am not going to post my name. I _am_ known to many of you on the net as I post articles fairly often from my own site. These postings were intended to help you. It is too late for any of the recommended actions to save me. Within a couple months I may be in prison for a crime I did not commit. I do not know if I will ever see my children again. If you _really_ want to know more, forget sending me mail. "Root" will quit forwarding soon anyway. Write instead to the organizations listed below. Ask for a copy of their newsletter. You don't have to commit anything to get them. S.O.F.T. C.W.A. 5312 9th Ave N.E. Suite 800 Seattle, WA 98105 122 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20001
carl@aoa.UUCP (Carl Witthoft) (01/02/86)
In article <575@sigma.UUCP> root@sigma.UUCP () writes: > > "The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment > by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." > -Louis Demblitz Brandeis > > >Sunday's (12/15/85) Seattle Times mentioned a new bill going before the >Legislature that presents an even greater threat to families in Washington. >The intent of the bill is good and I strongly support the intent of the >authors of this bill, but there is a clear danger in its implementation. Let me rephrase the entire posting whose lead-in is quoted above: ###### # ## # # ###### # # # # ## ## # ##### # # # # ## # ##### # # ###### # # # # # # # # # # # ###### # # # # ###### P.S. Can this be shoved back into net.politics or net.legal (also known as son.of.net.flame ) so we can avoid public display of this pseudo-discussion? Darwin's Dad ( Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates) {decvax,linus,ihnp4,ima,wjh12,wanginst}!bbncca!aoa!carl 54 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge,MA 02140 617-864-0201x356 "Selmer MarkVI, Otto Link 5*, and VanDoren Java Cut."
george@sysvis (01/07/86)
> The recent flood of {INSERT GROUP NAME HERE} with meta-discussion, flames, > insults, and other inappropriate garble (anything but sources), partially > caused by the lacking feature of the posting-software to prevent follow-ups > to net.sources {??????}, leads me to request this. Having to wade through > several hundred articles is a good enough argument for me. > Note that this is NOT censorship as such, as I don't mind all the bozo > back-and-forth discussion/insult-fest in group net.news.group, which I > have long since unsubscribed. If someone cares to start a moderated > group for that topic, I might consider finding time for it - not that ... For all those who vehemently killed several groups on the network because {INSERT REASON} ... This then is the result: 1). Excess baggage in improper forums which are the only reasonable place left to communicate a thought; 2). Lack of a PROPER forum to state/discuss one's ideas/thoughts; and 3). The GROSS amount of communications (net.verbage) is NOT reduced by killing groups. Those who wish to express things merely look for the MOST APPROPRIATE PLACE to do so. Hence, they are not stayed by the absence of a proper forum. Any ideas, oh great network gurus, and mee-too's? ihnp4!sys1!sysvis!george