The difference between moderation and censorship [was Re: Inspirational - Senator Culleton's Passionate...]

[juan]

On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 16:31:04 -0500
"\\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward at gmail.com> wrote:

> >> > 	Tell us quinn what to do with people like you, who post
> >> > very stupid 'defenses' of CENSORSHIP in an allegedly
> >> > 	crypto-anarchist mailing list?
> >>
> >> He's differentiating between floods of off-topic material which
> >> acts to censor real discussion by hiding it in noise vs. removing
> >> discussion which simply doesn't agree with some (explicit or
> >> implicit) preferential view.
> >
> > 	So you failed to understand all the points I made, or are
> > you just trolling me?
> 
> Actually, I incorporated your points, figuring they were too simple to
> enumerate and incorporated them within the last sentence of the first
> paragraph.


	Should I take that as mmeaning that you see and understand that
	quinn is nothing but a crass apologist of censorship and that
	his 'argument' for it is nonsensical at best, or just trolling? 


	Because what I'm getting from your two messages is that you
	didn't mention the points I made (you explicityl deleted them)
	and you followed quinn's wrong analogy about spam. 

	So for completness' sake. SPAM has LITTLE TO DO WITH THE
	CENSORSHIP ISSUE.

	Blocking mass, unsolicited advertising, sent by machines is not
	the same thing as blocking INDIVIDUAL messages from PEOPLE based
	on POLITICAL grounds. 
	
	
	"He's differentiating between..."


	No he isn't. He wants people to go from "blocking spam is OK"
	to "blocking whatever I want to block is OK". You don't get
	that, or what. 

	"You have to admit that it's different, si?


	WHAT is differnt? I have to admit that you are either
	agreeing with quinn, or if you are agreeing with me, you are
	doing it in a very cryptic way. Oh OK, since one of the topics
	here is cryptography, you post cryptic remarks? Makes sense
	somehow...or other.


















> 
> 'Nuff said.
> 
> \0x