Re: Censuring Censors

[maiullo@tms.attmail.com (Gary Maiullo)]

Cousin Kevin, re:

>>> Yes, the level of hypocrisy around here is absolutely astonishing. Has
anyone else noticed that our most stalwart defender of free speech, Gary, has
not said a single word about this?

        First of all, that's "gary", with a lower-case "g".
        
        Secondly, what the hell are you calling me a hypocrite for?  I think I
made my feelings clear about what Rich T. did when I told him he can "Blow 
me".  As for Fang's actions, I would not have done what he did, and I even 
mentioned that to him.  That doesn't mean I would have told him NOT to do what
he did.  And, for the record, I disagree with Bernd about pointing out Rich's 
web page.  If Rich set it up, I imagine he did it with the intent that surfers
will check it out (well, until he "closed" it, anyway, and that MIGHT tell you
something).  However, I DO agree with Bernd that it is not MY place (or anyone
else's, for that matter) to "pass judgement" on anyone;  I don't care about 
anybody's religious beliefs, their sexual preference, OR whether or not they 
eat meat.  I don't care what ANYBODY does, AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT DOING 
ANYTHING THAT IS HURTING ANYONE ELSE, OR INFRINGING ON SOMEONE ELSE'S RIGHTS.
Of course, that opens up a lot of GRAY AREA. 
        Here's how I look at it:  You got this guy (we know nothing about 
him) who starts E-mailing some of those on the list to "keep the posts on 
topic".  He gets replys of various tones from those that he E-mailed that 
those individuals will NOT comply with his rather unreasonable request 
(especially considering the TONE of his request, AND the fact that some of the
posts were actually "on-topic", or threads steming from on-topic discussions).
Now, I don't care about his E-mails to me -- the only action I take is to 
respond to it and delete it.  HOWEVER, I *strongly* resent him trying to 
tell OTHERS on the list what they may or may not post.  That pisses me off, 
because I might be interested in what some of these people have to say.  
        Now, some on the list may decide to take further action -- do a little
"investigative work",  and find out more about Who and What we are dealing 
with, including checking out the guy's Website, and even post some of it on 
the list.  What is wrong with that?  I mean the guy has a website for a 
reason;  you'd think he would appreciate the attention (well, I guess not).
And then SOMEONE (I wonder WHO!) might go even FURTHER and contact his place 
of employment, and then let the guy know that if he doesn't knock off the 
<Picard>, those on the list will be provided information to allow them to 
persue taking their own actions against him.  That left the ball in his court.
Now, _I_ wouldn't have done that;  I didn't think it was really necessary.  
After all, it's only the Who-list.... Who cares?!  But when you check it all 
out, it IS pretty creepy, what this Thomson guy is about.  I mean, he is a 
Libertarian, but then he starts telling people what to do.  THAT is more 
creepy than anything else about him...it is a complete contradiction in 
principle, and THAT tells me the guy is unstable.  Now, even knowing that, I 
would not have been prompted to call his company, but someone else felt it was
not unreasonable to take that action.  And he didn't turn the guy in;  he just
made it clear that if he kept at it, he would do HIMSELF in.  It is not MY 
style, but I will not condemn anyone for making that judgement call, 
considering ALL the information given.

        So WHO'S a hypocrite?  Not me, bud!  And it really pisses me off that
you would imply that.   SORRY, I was away for three days, do you mind?!  
Get with it, Kevin, you dope!  Now, apologize, or kiss my ass!
        

        gary m.  (STILL the resident Libertarian... a real one, too)

        ("Don't care was MADE to care"!)