From: --spin@iastate.edu-- <spin@iastate.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 93 22:16:36 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: BAN Detweiler(WHAT A LOON)
In-Reply-To: <9311170532.AA14620@pmantis.berkeley.edu>
Message-ID: <9311170616.AA25996@iastate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> I THINK ITS TIME TO TAKE DETWEILER OFF THE MAILING LIST,
>HE IS CLEARLY ABUSING THE PRIVELGE OF HAVING US AS AN AUDIENCE.
>ANY OTHERS ON THIS SIDE OF THE ISSUE??

No.

>      ANON
Did you really need to say this anonymously?  I favor anonymity for
a lot of uses and reasons.  I do not feel that a call to ban some one
is a legitimate reason to use this ability.  How can we guage the
feeling of the mailing-list when the voters are anonymous and therefore
could vote as often as they like? If you feel as though he should
be removed I do not feel that saying so anonymously does anything.
Unless of course you are Detweiler trying to provoke us into
agreeing to perceived censorship on your part.  

In any case I may choose to ignore his messages ala killfiles but I do
not feel that canning him is useful (it would only egg him on) nor
ethical.  

My personal feelings about him do not affect my decision to censor him.
I personally find his rantings to be useless (not all rants, just his)
and largely redundant and my kill file may contain him soon.  (Actually
I hate the killfile idea.... he may one day say something utterly profound
that I might miss out on.)

Oh, uh, I am rather new and I am having a wonderful time wading through
all my mail from all of you.  Particulary the procmail automation of
pgp.

Non-sig-here.