From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 11:57:45 -0800 (PST)
To: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>
Subject: Re: exclusion/censorship and the law
In-Reply-To: <3.0b28.32.19961107195807.0073290c@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.961108145449.24080E-100000@polaris>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 7 Nov 1996, Greg Broiles wrote:

> So my impression is that you've got the tail end of a useful concept
> (ability to control is frequently a factor used to determine liability) but
> are making far too much out of it. One really big difference I see here is
> that editorial control of the Cpunks list has occurred once (in 4? 5? years
> of the list's existence), is on a per-person not a per-message basis, and
> *does not function to restrict who can send messages but only limits Vulis'
> ability to _receive_ them on his usual system(s)*.

I usually dislike "me too" messages, but in the case of legal discussion,
I think they can be useful.  Having said that:

I concur.

--
Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures
Finger for Public Key   Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern
Vote Monarchist         Switzerland