Re: Censor-round

[WFang01@aol.com]

Bernd, re:

> The correct police station in our case is Paul. (And if sheriff Paul says
that RT isn't a case for the local police, then all of us - including you -
have to accept this decision.) 

This is not true. Paul may be responsible for the list, but not for someone's
private e-mail. 

What you said was:

>>Personally, I don't care what RT does outside of this list - as long as he
stops bothering us with his ill-famous private e-mail. 

The e-mail *IS* outside of the list. It's related to the list, but it's not
going through the list. It isn't up to Paul to take action on someone's
e-mail, but the source of the e-mail itself, in this case the company from
where it came from. See the difference?

>> Anything which goes beyond this list is like hiring a killer to extinguish
RT's family and friends.

No. Getting the person to stop the e-mail from it's source, is not like your
scenario. There are many remedies available to make someone stop "harrassing"
behavior before "killing their family and friends", isn't there? (You haven't
been reading those old SS handbooks have you?)

>>He has shown how great an idiot he is in his recent posting, where he was
unable to swallow his pride for just a little apology. 

I don't think that "pride" is a measure of one's intelligence, do you?
Actually, Mr. C. is quite bright. He may be depraved and unbalanced, but he's
not stupid. For some unknown reason he got a gerbil, I mean bug up his <Bev>
and started a censorship campaign against memebers of this list. If you'd
bothered to find out more about him, you'd see that this man has spent YEARS
studying and advocating for just the opposite. He *is* "Mr Free Speech".
(some irony) The point that you are missing, is that Mark David Chapman was
also one of the world's greatest Beatles fans and... he snapped. Now, while
I'm not implying or suggesting that Mr. C. is a violent person to other
people, I am saying that given the circumstances it doesn't make sense.
Personally, I'd like to see him get some help.

>>BTW:  Have you ever considered the possibility (1) that you might have
spoken to RT himself when you were contacting Parametric, or (2) that RT
could be the boss of that company?  Well, try to do so.  Maybe this thought
can help you to realize how inappropriate your reaction was.

Bernd, I thought you were a bit smarter than the "above". No, the first thing
I did was get REAL drunk, so I carefully ensured that nothing I said or did
would be recalled by me AND I'd make sure that various things I didn't want
to say or do would conveniently "slip out"...

FYI, PTC is a HUGE International Corporation. Pay more attention to one of
Mr. C's posts, his department is listed right on it. 

You're trying to "imagine" a conversation that took place and you don't have
the slightest clue. What you're underlying message is (since you brought it
up previously) is, what happens if it happens to YOU. Hey, if YOU are doing
something wrong adverse to your companies policies, I'd say a) you were
foolish for not understanding what the policies were in advance and any risks
you are taking, must be met with the eventual consequences as your superiors
invest more in what their employees are doing with their time... and b) spend
the extra few dollars a month on your OWN Internet provider. Use it a home,
lunch time, after work, etc. For the few dollars a month it may cost you, it
may save you from the embarrassment and consequence of having your boss "read
you the riot act"... 

What you do at work is solely your business & your company's business.
However, from my perspective, I'm giving you some valuable, free advice...

-wf