From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 94 16:49:48 PDT
To: gtoal@an-teallach.com (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Children and the Net
In-Reply-To: <199407311927.UAA24348@an-teallach.com>
Message-ID: <9407312349.AA06715@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Graham Toal says:
> 	structure on the net. I merely ALSO disagree with the flood of
> 	opinions that seem to say that he doesn't have the right to raise his
> 	children as he sees fit. If he wants to only let them see sanitized
> 
> Could you point one of this flood out then?  I didn't see any like that.
> I've no interest in interfering with how he raises his children.

You were merely extremely insulting. Others have suggested that he has
no right to raise his children as he sees fit.

Frankly, I find both disturbing. I spent most of last week working
cooperatively and productively with a member of the Clipper review
panel (you remember those folks) on internet security issues. He and I
may or may not have certain intense disagreements, but we put them
aside to accomplish various necessary tasks. (Several other fairly
radical members of this mailing list were members of the same working
group, by the way, and also managed to put things aside.) I find
Dorothy Denning, another member of that panel, to have views I rather
intensely dislike -- and I must admit to having stupidly resorted to
name calling in one posting I made in response to her. However, that
was silly, too -- there is no point in such behavior, and I admit to
having been wrong in doing so.

You do not win friends and influence people with insults. You do not
accomplish anything by throwing spoonfuls of hate at the other party
-- it doesn't convince him or her that you are a rational person.

As for the question of people suggesting that the individual does not
have the right to raise his children as he sees fit, you personally
insulted his religious views, and others insulted them and went so far
as to say that he should not be raising his children according to
them. The line between these two is slim in an argument even if it is
large in one's mind?

I find this trend among cypherpunks, who are SUPPOSED to be defenders
of diversity and freedom, rather odd. I would have expected people to
limit themselves to calmly stating that Mr. Zooks should find another
way to accomplish the goal of raising his children free from
influences he dislikes. Instead they seem to have taken it upon
themselves to decide whether or not his religion or personality
requires realignment, and some have, yes, even gone so far as to
suggest that he doesn't know how to raise his own kids.

Perry