Re: The Lady speaks

["Rich Davies" <rich@daviesdesign.com>]

I am also a "lurker", but I happen to agree with Greg. Certainly everyone is
entitled to speak freely what's on their mind. But credibility  and
believability is, or at least should be, severely compromised when one
chooses to hide behind a moniker. I agree that Greg can be a little rough
sometimes, but if these people (or 'person' as the case may be) don't like
it, then they can post using their real identity, having the courage to be
associated with their own statements.

Freedom of speech is not about being able to make an anonymous statement
intended to muddy the water or inflame others; it's about having beliefs,
thoughts and ideas and *not* hiding when you proclaim them.

Rich D.

----------
>From: Gregory Odegaard <grodeg@kalama.com>
>To: "celtics@igtc.com" <celtics@igtc.com>, LadyNada <ladynada@mediaone.net>,
"'Dennis Bates'" <m_dennis@bates85.freeserve.co.uk>
>Subject: RE: The Lady speaks
>Date: Thu, Mar 2, 2000, 4:01 PM
>

> Thanks Dennis, but this is no Lady.  It is Way of the Ray, as is Snoopy et
> al.  Do you support free speech when the person doesn't even have the guts
> to identify themselves or talks out of at least half a dozen side of their
> face?  Most papers over here don't take anonymous letters to the editor,
> because to speak your mind you must have the guts to identify yourself.
> You do, I do and most do, and some don't for very valid security reasons,
> but when all these stupid monikers come from the same damn computer, then
> clearly we have a pure coward and bully.
>
> Speak your mind all you want, just be a man enough to do with YOUR name,
> not some insulting tag line.  Sure I can appreciate your beef, but you
> clearly don't have all the facts.  Check your files, this person has an
> agenda that shames us all, and many agree with me.
>