From: "david d `zoo' zuhn" <zoo@armadillo.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 12:38:39 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Carol Anne - C'Punk Poster Person?
Message-ID: <199501062040.OAA06369@monad.armadillo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



I don't think there's much of a case for 'poster child' status involved.  

Users on the Winternet systems (of which I happen to be one) sign an
Agreement stating that they'll abide by Netiquette whenever using internet
services.  Failure to do so can result in termination of service.  This is
Mike's way to limit the amount of time he has to spend dealing with users
who generate flamage.  There was [apparently] another issue involving
reselling of service that I don't have details on, but which is likely to
be related.

Where's the censorship?  I don't see it.  CarolAnne is free to make
whatever statements she likes (since she has service from another
provider).  The New York Times doesn't have to allow me to put an article
on page one (much as I might wish to do so).  That's not censorship either.
No one is obligated to provide a soap box for someone to stand on.

This is a free market issue, not free speech.  Since there is competition
in the local area, people are free to choose whichever provider they like.
Some have more explicit AUP's than others.  Some probably haven't even
considered the issue.  There's no one crying "Foul!  Begone from the net
forever".  THAT would be censorship.  But this is a case of "You're not
following my rules.  Be gone from my machine."

I've got my own setup at home, mostly independent of network provider and
becoming moreso as time progresses, to prevent J. Random Sysadmin from
cutting me off arbitrarily.  It costs more money this way, but that's not
entirely unreasonable.  

I'd rather see a market of half a dozen or more providers in any given
area, each mostly independent, providing a number of choices as to service
levels and policy expectations, instead of a monolithic Micro$oft (or AOL
or CI$ or Delphi or etc) "We ARE the Internet" where censorship (in the
traditional definition of someone vetting any public [or private!]
postings) is much more common.

I could see a market for service where someone who decided to armorplate
their machine could provide service to those who persist in doing
"net.stupid.things".  Provide anonymous accounts on that machine, and
remailer accounts, and such, and then stand back and ignore all of the
flamage that will come the way of root|postmaster|usenet|whatever.

[ Personally, I'd likely put that domain into my global killfiles, but
  that's selective reading, not censorship.  ]

[ More disclaimers -- I don't represent Winternet in any way, nor Mike
  Horwath nor CarolAnne Braddock.  I have no connection with Winternet
  except as a customer.  I speak solely for myself and Armadillo Zoo
  Enterprises. And I'm not afraid of an electronic stalking prosecution. ]


  -- 
  -  david d `zoo' zuhn  -| armadillo zoo software -- St. Paul, Minnesota
  --  zoo@armadillo.com --|   unix generalist (and occasional specialist)
  ------------------------+   http://www.armadillo.com/ for more information
    pgp key upon request  +----------------------------------------------------