Dale Thorn wrote:
Sandy Sandfort wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Toto wrote:
I am finding it hard to understand how the same people who seemed dedicated to silencing Dr. DV K on this list can then turn around and 'correct' him, or 'add to' his comments, or 'one-up' him in the insult department.
Correcting is not an insult. His statement was incorrect or incomplete. I corrected it. His comment was on topic, though in error. My correction was on topic. He was not "silenced" in any way. Toto's proposition, therefore, does not make sense to me. Contrary to several peoples erroneous assumptions, there will be no flaming--of anyone--on the moderated list. When moderation is under weigh, I will do nothing to restrain flaming on the flame and unedited lists. Toto's prejudice (in the literal sense of the word, i.e., "to pre-judge") is showing.
Please don't get the wrong idea, that I'm paranoid or something, but I think I just saw a tiny leak, a miniscule Freudian slip of sorts - Sandy says "I will do nothing to restrain ..... the unedited list...".
Do we now have to have occasional assurances that the "unedited" list is not being restrained? I thought that was a given, beyond question of any kind. I thought *all* of the controversy revolved around the edited/censored list (having stole the original list's name), and that everyone understood that the uncensored list was untouchable. But now Sandy is taken to offering reassurances. What's next??
I am getting tired now, but here is a proposed solution. You suspect Prof. Sandfort in an intention to edit "unedited" list. You do not trust administrators of toad.com. I hope though that there are people whom you somewhat trust. If you trust me, or someone else, like Prof. Dave Hayes, here's what we can do: I establish a sendmail alias cypherpunks@algebra.com that expands to, say, your address and also cypherpunks@toad.com. You can encourage all people, whom you expect to be censored on the unedited list, to post through cypherpunks@algebra.com. I can even set up a little program that would digitally sign receipts of all messages coming to cypherpunks@algebra.com. You and anyone else can receive such receipts. It means that you, Dale Thorn, in cooperation with other readers but WITHOUT cooperation from toad.com, will be able to see which articles sent through algebra.com finally made it to the unedited list. Not all posters will use such service, but you can expect the "censored" people to do so. If you indeed notice an impropriety, the digitally signed receipts will be your proof that articles were submitted. As long as the other readers trust me (or Dave Hayes, or whoever volunteers), you will have a strong case even without relying on freudian slips. - Igor.