From: Blanc Weber <blancw@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 14:08:59 -0800 (PST)
To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: RE: Silence is not assent (re the Vulis nonsense)
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=RED-81-MSG-961204214721Z-812@INET-03-IMC.itg.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From:	Dale Thorn (in reply to Tim May)

If you, Sandy, and the other offenders *really* want to keep the noise
down, then next time ask John directly for a reply, and if none is
forthcoming, say to the list *once*, "John will not answer up", etc.,
and let the subscribers draw their own conclusions from the silence,
instead of from your inane "defenses".
..........................................................


As for myself, I was not speaking for Gilmore nor defending him when I
added my reply to the discussion.   I brought up an item which others
had overlooked (the fact that Vulis had challenged John to censor him)
as specific reference to include in their judgement of his actions, as
well as illustrating how Vulis had invested a lot of effort in
motivating someone into just such a response.

As I mentioned in another post yesterday, situations like this, where
people overlook elements in an argument, are opportunities for others to
"fill in the blanks" or add commentary to clear up the understanding of
a situation.  It is not unusual for cpunks to post their opinions about
an event on the list.   The cpunks have strong opinions regarding
censorship and there are always arguments about the details of its
impropriety or the place of it in a society; the list is a form of
cyberspatial "virtual" society, and if the concept of censorship vs
private property as it affects the list comes up, it is to be expected
that the ideas will be addressed.

So I (and others as well) were addressing the *ideas* of censorship &
the actions of private property owners, arguing in regard of a more
precise & correct understanding of the principles involved,  as
exemplified by John's actions  -  but not in place of his own
"self-defense" of them.

Frankly, most of the long-time members of the list would not need any
such statements of defense from John in order to appreciate the nature
of the circumstance and the reasoning for his symbolic 'censorship'.

   ..
Blanc