At 03:08 PM 11/3/96 -0800, blanc <blancw@cnw.com> wrote:
Vulis did everything to set himself up for what he got, did he not.
Indeed - my hunch is that this is the result that Vulis was determined to get, and would have done whatever was necessary to bring it about. Now he can cry that he is the "victim" of evil censorship, and he can wear the white hat of virtue - notwithstanding that he consciously sought to be censored, and has himself contributed mightily towards the (temporary) destruction of an otherwise useful list. Now he can leave the list with his "virtue" and his pride intact; something he could not have done had he simply unsubscribed himself. There are plenty of people who would have (and will) help him if he manages to come up with something on-topic to say. But, short-term, he's gotten what he was looking for (a chance to play victim) and we get a list with less crap on it. Perhaps we should have a moment of silence for Dmitri Vulis, sympathetic victim, target of dastardly censors, paragon of virtue and righteousness. I'll go ahead and have mine now. Given that John Gilmore is the source of the oft-repeated "The net sees censorship as damage and routes around it" quote, it strikes me as unlikely that he took the steps he did without some reflection on their meaning, consequences, and chances of success. -- Greg Broiles | "We pretend to be their friends, gbroiles@netbox.com | but they fuck with our heads." http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | |