At 02:56 PM 1/6/97 +1000, Robert Barnes <rbarnes@gil.com.au> wrote: [snip]

My bottom line feeling with respect to this is that we cannot expect freedom unless we are willing to exercise responsibility. It is apparent that the people who are noisiest about freedom of speech and content censoring are working tirelessly to abuse the list and provoke the very opposite of their stated ideals.

Hmmm. There has been some of that, but some of use who have spoken about freedom of speech have done so because of legitimate concerns, not just to gain advantage in an ongoing, juvenile campaign.

As for the spammers who have run riot in recent months, moderation will remove the burden of re-transmitting this unwanted garbage from the list server and save us all the time and effort currently wasted dealing with it.

Not completely. The plan John mentioned didn't elimainate the full version of the list -- it just added a modertated version. There will still be some garbage floating through Toad Hall, but not as much :) I think the idea of two versions of the list is an excellent one, and it avoids the issues raised by presenting the list in only a moderated form. If people want the spam they can have it, and if they don't they can take advantage of John and Sandy's work, and read a more coherent version of the list. I will certainly choose the latter, but it is nice to know that the choice is mine. John and Sandy -- thanks for getting this rolling. Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause