🚀 go-pugleaf

[ i must admit that i'm starting to feel a little schizophrenic.  i'm not sure
  which side i'm on anymore. ]

In article <barryCnHxu6.D1n@netcom.com>, Kenn Barry <barry@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <CnHFHx.E97@reptiles.org> jim@reptiles.org (Jim Mercer) writes:
>>it is commonly accepted that in a truely free environment, you can do whatever
>>you want so long as it does not have detrimental effects on others.
>
>	You should really get an education. Even in _Canada_ you're
>allowed to do all kinds of things that might have a detrimental effect
>on others. The missing phrases are "with malice" or "reckless
>endangerment".

driving your car at 100 km/h (kanadian miles per hour) on a highway is legal,
moral, and ethical. it has no detrimental effects.

driving your car at 100 km/h on a highway, aiming it at a stranded motorist
flagging you down is maybe not illegal, but isn't moral or ethical.
this has a detrimental effect of scaring the be-jeebers out of the stranded
motorist.  ok, he shouldn't have been standing in the road, and maybe
your driving straight for him would teach him that it is a bad idea to
do that.

posting in netnews is not illegal, moral and ethical.  

posting banned facts into sensitive areas, with full knowledge that it
will like cause some news readers grief, is not moral, or ethical.
sure, you are trying to teach someone a lesson, but your actions are hurting
the netnews access of others.

if you have a bone to chew with the way the court is dealing with this,
get off your ass, photocopy the washington post article and come up here
and hand them out on the lawn of Osgoode Hall (the main court house,
also where i work).

pissing your banned articles into sensitive newsgroups is pointless.

the people deciding to cut off access are not going to change because of your
actions.  these are the same people who ban alt.sex and alt.binaries for
the same reason.  they aren't trying to stop people from seeing it, they are
trying to protect their systems from being seized by the government.

>>intentionally punting holmonka info into ontario is detrimental to people
>>in ontario.
>
>	...in your uninformed opinion, which I do not value. I believe
>this whole controversy will have neutral-to-positive effects on the
>people of Ontario, as the authorities get their collective faces
>repeatedly rubbed in the fact that the ban is both stupid and
>impractical.

i belevie that this will probably push the government into having a more
"star chamber" like system for the next sensitive case.

if the media can not be trusted to hold their tongues so the wheels of
justice can turn a bit further, then maybe they should be locked out.

what is more important, a fair trial, or a better Neilson rating for
A Current Affair?

>>i think that by now the point has been made that you can't stop the flow
>>of information across the electronic media.
>
>	Then what _is_ your point?? People posting facts about the case
>aren't your problem, idiots in local positions of authority are, and I
>can't help you with that problem, beyond providing minor opportunities
>for them to display their idiocy in public, and thus discredit
>themselves. Again, people posting facts on the case are irrelevant at
>worst, and helpful at best, in alleviating Ontario's censorship
>problem.

your "help" is more of a hinderance.

as i said before, if you really want to change things, netnews is not the
place.

>	But the judge thinks he can have it both ways; I guess being a
>judge can give one an exaggerated sense of one's power :-). Reporters
>allowed, but they can't write their stories. Now _that_, sonny, is
>censorship, the pure coin. It's _prima facie_ offensive to anyone who
>actually understands why a free press is important, and it's impractical
>to boot, as subsequent events have proven beyond doubt - the "secret" is
>out.

no, censorship would be that the reporters could _never_ write their stories.

the court just wanted to delay publication until after Teal's trial.

-- 
[ Jim Mercer   Reptilian Research  merce@iguana.reptiles.org  +1 416 506-0654 ]
[   "... or you can become a road-kill on the information superhighway."      ]
[                                   -- Colin Mcgregor                         ]