On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 08:33:33AM -0500, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
On Thu, 2016-06-23 at 22:38 +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
I don't know Alex, but I do know this: I have an expectation (recently dashed to smithereens) that a project such as Tor Inc, promoting "freedom of speech, whistleblowing and more", should facilitate at least ONE public communication forum (email list) which list has a strong guarantee of freedom of speech, even though most or all other lists may be considered semi or fully private club lists (only excepting the laws which bind that corporation in its jurisdiction - a corporation obviously cannot fail to censor illegal "speech" in its home jurisdiction).
I am all for freedom of speech, but a list started for a specific purpose becomes useless if most, or even many, of the posts are off-topic. The tor-talk list (which I do not subscribe to) was started for a specific purpose, and allowing the continued posting of off-topic garbage defeats the whole purpose of having such a list.
Im saying "ok, so we agree folks have the right to create private clubs (private/ authoritarian/ moderated lists)" - what do you think about my expectation that Tor Inc actually live a bit of what it preaches and provide at least one "free speech, go for it guys and gals" list?
I don't work for the US military or US government, but I support the TOr Project's and Graham Boyce's efforts to restore order to the list in principle. Those who have threatened to rejoin the list under other identities have committed a despicable and reprehensible act and deserve the ban from the forum they have received.
I don't know who you're referring to - I've seen no threats to rejoin, but I did see Cecilia respectful (if painfully submissive) request to be allowed to rejoin under her own provisio then she keep herself "on-topic". It seems evident she cannot even contact Boyce since he has kill filed her. Would you agree that users who are about to be banned, ought be given, say, AT LEAST ONE CHANCE to comply with a request to "stop posting off topic, if you continue we will ban you"? To my mind, that would be a sane foundation for the development of anything I would consider "community", but most "communities" administrators/ censors/ democratic dictators don't seem to give a rats...
I will admit that sometimes our governments in the US sometimes get it wrong when passing laws. We as a nation have learned from our mistakes and the history of the laws reflect this.
I'm guessing you're talking about "we" as in America and Americans? Because that does not include me, and says to me, more about you.
To infiltrate an e-mail list originated from private computer systems with off-topic posts, and then to threaten to continue doing so despite being banned from that list is against the law in most states and I believe violates Federal law as well.
Perhaps that happened. I did not see that, and so your assertion seems to me to be taken out of context of reality, and with a healthy dose of USA laws bias/ prejudice.
It is the right of the Tor Project and the people behind it to refuse to re-publish off-topic messages. To that effect, I support the Tor Project taking legal action against any such offenders if that becomes necessary.
Wow. You're really hard core here. Intended or not by you, you are coming across to me as pretty hard core fascist. If not intended, I grant you may just be modern-classicly schooled.