From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 14:03:21 +0800
To: Stephan Mohr <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: free speach and the government
Message-ID: <199602040548.VAA04878@shell1.best.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 10:52 PM 2/3/96 +0000, Stephan Mohr wrote:
> But do
> you fighter[s] for free speech, in principle, think that nothing, really
> nothing, [should] be prevented [from] being published?

Yes:

> [...]
>
>I know, of course, that by accepting that there is something that
>shouldn't be available on the net, we would need something to decide what
>and how to ban. So I wonder what would be a more 'net'-like way of handling 
>this type of thing and how to prevent that some 'strong-armed' governments
>take the net over.

There is no "net-like" way of preventing people from communicating 
when one wishes to speak and another wishes to listen.  To attempt 
to achieve such a goal violates the principles that made the internet
possible, such as the "no settlements" rule.


 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
We have the right to defend ourselves	|   http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
and our property, because of the kind	|  
of animals that we are. True law	|   James A. Donald
derives from this right, not from the	|  
arbitrary power of the state.		|   jamesd@echeque.com