From: Rabid Wombat <wombat@mcfeely.bsfs.org>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:52:41 -0800 (PST)
To: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list
In-Reply-To: <199701251011.CAA23822@toad.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970126133331.6251B-100000@mcfeely.bsfs.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue 
was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list 
"population." 

The decision of that small segment to excercise its rights "in extreme" 
passed the tolerance thresholds of increasing numbers of list members, 
and the end result was a "restriction" adopted/elected/forced-on (colour 
it however you chose) on the entire "population."

"Rights" are derived from social responsibility; its either that, or the 
"law of the jungle."

-r.w.


On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote:

> Cynthia H. Brown wrote:
> > Beauty, flames and censorship are all in the eyes of the beholder.
> > However, by providing both "raw" and "cooked" versions of the list, Sandy

<SNIP>

> I apologize for intruding, Cynthia, but I have a question about "doing
> as s/he sees fit".  For example, what is the list?  Is it the equipment,
> is it the software that runs on the equipment, or is it the contents of
> the list (my writings, your writings, etc.)?  If I had to rank them, I
> would rank the contents as being more important than the equipment or
> the software.  That said, how can those contents be considered the
> property of the list owner/manager to do with as they see fit?
> 
> I do understand that they have the right to manage the list as they see
> fit, and to move the messages into whatever buckets seem appropriate,
> but your phrasing suggested more to me, and I'm puzzled by it.
> 
> 
>