On Tue, 12 Nov 1996, Bill Frantz wrote:
There is a serious error here. Gilmore did nothing to prevent Vulis from posting to the list. He only prevented Vulis from receiving the list under his own name. And, the as hominem attacks continue.
Yes, I understand this. It's quite obvious; being removed from the subscriber list hasn't slowed Vulis at all. When I was writing the piece Vulis seemed to have slowed his ad hominem attacks and instead was talking about censorship (something that is within the charter of the list), but perhaps the reprieve was only temporary. The point I was trying to make at the end and that I may not have done very successfully is that it would be very difficult to prevent Vulis from *posting* to the list under his name; he then could do it through remailers. And blocking remailers is unacceptable. So how does one kick someone else out of a forum where anonymous speech is allowed? -Declan
At 9:33 AM 11/12/96 -0800, Declan McCullagh wrote:
The Netly News http://www.netlynews.com/ November 11, 1996
Cypher-Censored By Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) ... That is, until recently, when Dimitri Vulis was given the boot. After he refused to stop posting flames, rants and uninspired personal attacks, Vulis was summarily removed from the mailing list.
...
Thus began a debate over what the concept of censorship means in a forum devoted to opposing it. Did Gilmore have the right to show Vulis the virtual door? Or should he have let the ad hominem attacks continue, encouraging people to set their filters accordingly? The incident raises deeper questions about how a virtual community can prevent one person from ruining the forum for all and whether only government controls on expression can be called "censorship."
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The lottery is a tax on | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | those who can't do math. | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz@netcom.com | - Who 1st said this? | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA