Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)
Hi, Forwarded message:
From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 10:00:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)
I think that your analogy is slightly flawed.
While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road.
Correct and using my model would in no way interfere with a users use of the network. It would not add excessive delay or other impedemants. It would be a one time event that occured when the site was initialy accessed. Much like having to go past the picketers on the side of the road at least once.
There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the packets will be watching. :)
If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more so than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw man argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage@ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199706050148.UAA04173@einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/04/97 at 08:48 PM, Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com> said:
Hi,
Forwarded message:
From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 10:00:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)
I think that your analogy is slightly flawed.
While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road.
Correct and using my model would in no way interfere with a users use of the network. It would not add excessive delay or other impedemants. It would be a one time event that occured when the site was initialy accessed. Much like having to go past the picketers on the side of the road at least once.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree. If I am stoped even once that is one time too many. In the real world if a group of picketers try to impead my entrance to a store parking lot the growl of a 427 does alot to convince them of the errors of their ways. :)
There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the packets will be watching. :)
If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more so than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw man argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants.
Yes and it is the participants who are sending the packets. If I am sending packets between point A & B you have no right to interfere with those transmisions. You donot have the right to re-route them or substute them for others. If you have somthing to say put up a web page and if I am interested I'll stop by and take a look. You don't have the right to force me to look. To do so would be a serious perversion of the 1st Amendment. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM5Ym5o9Co1n+aLhhAQEbfwP8Ch1BB7nrIak2Baep5plGpQxZL3tia4Eu c09a5CERexO6UXsbjUcVpH7Yn+npeJLSGGVnzgsLD+rm3grpykffg7s+I0QBT7kO 0A6z9sQiDKlaqpdlSctairH2t+AOjR0p1/PQH22NPotvoWviHflVSH8nihegC2z4 tteGKpxHeDQ= =3meN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Unfortunately, Jim has no idea what he's talking about. Accepting public money does not magically turn something into a public forum. I'm not sure how I can get this idea through. -Declan On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Jim Choate wrote:
If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more so than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw man argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants.
participants (3)
-
Declan McCullagh -
Jim Choate -
William H. Geiger III