A comment on the censorship policy
I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing. (Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he longs to see Oksas naked.) This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy. (If this is dumped into the "Not suitable for Cypherpunks to read" list, I urge those of you who see it to pass it on to the main list.) END --
On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote:
I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing.
WEll....that's not so bad ;)
(Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, Is it so annoying...? why did you read it to that point??? :) Why could you not be so anonymous and tell me? My posts are a bit brief; Blancs' are far better, next time read hers.
engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he longs to see Oksas naked.)
Huh?? You are being a 'fluff' here ;)
This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy.
(If this is dumped into the "Not suitable for Cypherpunks to read" list, I urge those of you who see it to pass it on to the main list.)
END
--
OKSAS <oksas@asimov.montclair.edu> writes:
On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote:
I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing.
WEll....that's not so bad ;)
I find Oksas's posts to be very interesting.
(Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, Is it so annoying...? why did you read it to that point??? :) Why could you not be so anonymous and tell me? My posts are a bit brief; Blancs' are far better, next time read hers.
engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he longs to see Oksas naked.)
Huh?? You are being a 'fluff' here ;)
"Anonymous" is lying - I never posted any such thing. of course the cocksuckr moderator passed on the "anon's" lies to the censored mailing list, and I bet he's goingto auto-bounce my refutation to "flames" - just as everyone had predicted.
This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy.
(If this is dumped into the "Not suitable for Cypherpunks to read" list, I urge those of you who see it to pass it on to the main list.)
If you don't like the sandfart's moderation policy, you can just read the unedited list and institute your own moderation policy using 'procmail'. That's pretty much what the sandfart does anyway. Fluff from people he likes makes it to the censored list (like a request to jya's bot cc'd to the whole censored list) whie anything I or Toto or Oksas say is auto-junked. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
OKSAS <oksas@asimov.montclair.edu> writes:
On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote:
I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing.
WEll....that's not so bad ;)
I find Oksas's posts to be very interesting.
Thank you.
(Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, Is it so annoying...? why did you read it to that point??? :) Why could you not be so anonymous and tell me? My posts are a bit brief; Blancs' are far better, next time read hers.
engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he longs to see Oksas naked.)
Huh?? You are being a 'fluff' here ;)
"Anonymous" is lying - I never posted any such thing. of course the cocksuckr moderator passed on the "anon's" lies to the censored mailing list, and I bet he's goingto auto-bounce my refutation to "flames" - just as everyone had predicted.
Anonymous is a jerk.
Best Regards,
OKSAS
Anonymous wrote:
I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing.
Dear Mr. or Ms. Anonymous, It is extremely easy to understand. Just read your own words. The key word here is 'accurate' criticisms. This makes them 'flames', in Sandy's mind, because the purpose of the 'censorship experiment' was to place total control of the list in the hands of a man who rarely posts and doesn't seem to participate in the list discussions, as well as for the purpose of suppressing any real dissent that may arise from list members. Also, one of the reasons that the moderation process is so haphazard, is that posts from some individuals are automatically routed to the 'flames' list at some times, and viewed/censored at other times, so that a few can be posted to the censored list to give some half-hearted illusion of fairness in the censorship process. (which remains a bad joke, nonetheless). Thank you for using the word 'inane' to describe some of my posts. Most people aren't polite enough to drop the 's' when using the word. (Not that it matters. Some individuals are automatically 'flame-approved' for the censored list.) Also, I wouldn't be too sure that the email you receive from toad.com accurately reflects what is being posted to each list. There are some funny things going on between 'incoming' and 'outgoing', and some of them are designed to make the process obtuse, and hard to follow.
has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he longs to see Oksas naked.)
Try deleting the irrelevant parts before printing out the parts about seeing Nurdane naked. That will save you time, and get you to the bathroom quicker.
This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy.
I think that you are being overly kind, once again, in suggesting that there really is a 'policy'. It's more like a crapshoot (pardon the pun), where the spots on the dice change at his personal whim. Toto
participants (4)
-
dlv＠bwalk.dm.com -
nobody＠REPLAY.COM -
OKSAS -
Toto