At 10:00 AM 11/4/96 -0500, you wrote:
someone abuses that priveledge they may lose it. Plain and simple. It is also worthy to note that the Right to Free Speech, etc. applies to the government (IOW, the government can not hinder the right to free speech so long as that speech does not infringe upon someone else's right. Since when is this list government run? The decision was apparently a personal one.
I don't think anyone has argued that the owner of the list doesn't have the right to remove people from it. However, simply because he has the right to doesn't mean he should, and it also doesn't mean other members can't or shouldn't argue that he made a bad decision (unless, of course, the dissenting members are removed as well.) Many, if not most, members believe the list should be run in a non-authoritarian manner (whoever argued that the term authoritarian applies only to governments is wrong. the difference is a person has the right to act in an authoritarian manner over his own property whereas a government doesn't have that right over it's citizens. Again, however, having the right doesn't necessarily make it "okay"). //cerridwyn//