On 13 Feb 1997, Against Moderation wrote:
Date: 13 Feb 1997 17:17:32 -0000 From: Against Moderation <antimod@nym.alias.net> To: aga@dhp.com Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com, cypherpunks@pgh.org, ichudov@algebra.com, dlv@bwalk.dm.com, freedom-knights@jetcafe.org Subject: Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 11:24:57 -0500 (EST) From: aga <aga@dhp.com>
Well, the fact remains that the homos are instrumental in creating and forming a cliquish and censored usenet. There is just no question about that. Remember the previous cypherpunk who stated that the gays "created and run usenet."
No. Who said that, and why do you think the person was serious, let alone telling the truth?
It was on the list last month, and the person was serious and correct. That is exactly why we must now kill all of usenet as it stands, for a new heterosexual beginning.
Your assumption that I am a "bigot" makes it you appear uninformed. Sexism is good, but racism is bad. A sexist is not a bigot.
The only one who qualifies as a "bigot" is a racist.
According to the American Heritage dictionary: bigot n. One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
Nothing in there about faggots or cunts, is there?
According to Webster: bigot n. One obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his own opinions and prejudices
Nothing in there about faggots or cunts, is there? Again, MY definition of a "bigot" is the correct one which is most understood by modern people. A "bigot" is a racist, period.
I see nothing that limits bigotry to racial intolerance.
You are a fool then. Religion and sexism and groups all have nothing to do with bigotry. A bigot is a racist, period. That is TODAY'S correct definition of the term, and I am a lot more current than Webster. Any anybody who has a "religion" and "prays" is a fool. The only god you will ever find is within yourself.
It is very logical and wise to discriminate on the basis of sex.
Most would disagree, and decide based on that and other statements you have made that you must be an extremely unpleasant person.
See, there you go again, attacking the person, instead of the argument. You lose points for that. Sexism is GOOD and right and justified. I want a woman cutting my hair, and a man fixing my car, and I demand the correct sex for ALL activities.
If you want to fight censorship effectively, going around telling people "You're a shit-eating faggot you fucking cock-sucking homo censor" in public forums is not going to win you many points.
Look sonny, I am not out to win any points. I have two Doctorates and 22 years of experience. I speak with authority and only to those who have the intelligence to understand. I was a perfect 4.00 in College, and am probably the most intelligent body-politic analyst in the world. Now let's face it: Faggots are BAD news. They are most always censors! And that is the truth you can never get around.
Instead, it will quickly land you in many people's killfiles, and will eventually lead some people with bad client software to wonder if it wouldn't be worth giving up some freedom of speech for the benefit of not having to see your rants any more.
Hey boy, I am too strong to stop. I have more people and, more money and more connections than you could ever dream of. We are here to "rip new assholes" in the faggots who have ruined the net thus far, and to take over and make this net heterosexual oriented. Just wait until you see me in person some day; you are in for a big suprise.
I'm not saying you don't have a right to express your opinions. I'm just remarking that you appear to be more in the business of inducing censorship than fighting it.
No, all censorship shall be eliminated from this Net and I will fight to the death to achieve that. The only way to stop us is to kill all of us, and you can not do that. I have 6 or 8 associates that you are unaware of, and we plan to KILL the current system real soon.
If that's the case, so be it; someone has to get censored in order for people to fight censorship, and exposing people's willingness to censor is not necessarily a bad thing in itself.
So you plan on censoring me? Not likely sonny boy. I have more connections than you have fingers on your one hand.
Unfortunately, it sort of makes life harder for those who actually fight the censorship when you pretend to be one of them. Your argument seems to run something like, "To protect freedom of speech, bad all faggots from the net, and especially don't let them run any mailing lists."
That is a good idea. Faggots are most always censors, and can not be trusted with heterosexual people.
If this offensive and highly noticeable argument eclipses many of the important, fundamental ones as the censors would like it too (why do you think your articles make it to cypherpunks- flames while mine only get as far as -unedited),
Because of the faggot. They always try to censor the TRUTH!
you will end up not only inducing censorship but also seriously hampering the efforts of those who are legitimately fighting that censorship.
Look sonny, we are out to KILL John Gilmore's control of this net, and your listing of the -three- different lists manufactured by that fucking queer should put the icing on the cake.
I am not a racist, so therefore I can not be a "bigot," regardless of my views on homosexuality.
See above.
Again: Most faggots are censorous, and therefore NO faggots should ever have any control over any "censoring" acvtivities of this net. Period. We have come to the time when one's sex and sexual orientation should be clearly stated on all e-mail and Usenet commo. Everyone should start providing the data, for the good of the community. No one should be forced to communicate with a faggot.