From: Declan McCullagh <declan@pathfinder.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 13:00:31 +0800
To: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
Subject: Re: New Ratings Categories / Re: Yet another self-labeling system (do you remember -L18?)
In-Reply-To: <199707261158.NAA19507@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970727003652.23109A-100000@cp.pathfinder.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Sure. I've done it before. They give weasel answers, small surprise there.
Some (though not all) misrepresent the law, distort the truth, and flat
out lie.

Do I accuse them of being fascist censorhappy wackos? Yes. Motherfuckers?
No; my editors generally don't go for it.

I mean, the biggest problem with the CDA was overbreadth. It pulled a
bait-n-switch maneuver: saying it protects children while restricting the
rights of adults. Which is why the SupCt struck it down.

-Declan


On Sat, 26 Jul 1997, Anonymous wrote:

> 
>   A Challenge To Declan: Do you have the balls to contact all of those
> individuals pushing for fascist censorship in the name of "protecting
> children" and ask them if they would support the rights of adults to
> promote and access adult material on the InterNet if a way can be found
> to guarantee that minors will not be able to access it?
>   Do you have the balls to refuse letting them dodge the issue with
> meaningless, bullshit, political rhetoric? Do you have the balls to
> tell them that if you don't get a straight answer,  you will report 
> that they are lying, fascist, censorist motherfuckers who are hiding
> behind children to disguise their hidden agenda of forcing their 
> personal beliefs on others?