🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3vmc1k$d5t@Jupiter.mcs.net>, karl@Mcs.Net (Karl Denninger) wrote:

> On average, far less than 1% of the postings in a given group are copyright
> violations.  I note that quoting a post for the purpose of comment and reply
> in the same fora where it was originally taken is *not* a violation of
> copyright.
> 
> In those groups mentioned, far over *half* of the on-topic material posted
> is a violation of copyright!  In the warez groups, for example, the number
> is closer to 100%!
> 
> By definition a group entitled "gigabytes of copyright violations" bears
> inspection to see if it really is, in fact, comprised of exactly that.
> 
> I note that the *entire reason* people want those groups is to get access to
> *exactly* that stolen material.  For most groups in general that is *not*
> the case; people are after free-form discussion or original works.

So to clear up, you are not in any way basing your policy on ethical
issues but rather on intentionality and percentile averages of copyright
infringements in the affore mentioned groups. Am I correct on this?
Consequently, if I were to create a group who's reson d'etre had nothing
to do with copyright infringements and just happened to contain 1% - 49%
of copyrighted material at any given time, it would be openly carried by
you, simply because it fit comfortably within a framework, created by you,
of what were acceptable breaches of conduct and/or the law? If this is the
case, you ARE basing your descisions upon ethical considerations. What's
more, you are creating this ethical system yourself. Look it up; it's
Ethics 101.

You mentioned that we should get off the kick of assigning the attributes
of Christian morality to your motivations. Firstly, I don't remember
anything about Christianity comming up. (Although I could be wrong seeing
that I usually scan this stuff.) And secondly, there really can't be such
a thing as Christian  MORALITY; ethicality yes, morality no. Ethics are
phenomenological systems of valuative judgements which are CREATED to
provide a framework of what is "right" or "wrong" in a given environment.
Morality, on the other hand, deals on a more metaphysical level with
universalized ontological considerations for these constructs. I don't
mean to belabor the point, nor do I wish to hold a class in philosophy, I
simply want to make you aware that from what you have relayed, you are
playing it very fast and loose with your reasoning; vasilating between
legal, ethical, and moral concerns. 

I do not get the impression that you have given a great deal of thought to
what you are doing in your editing activities but merely picking the first
and most attractive defence or motivation which will vindicate you or
serve your purposes without any concern as to whether or not this
patchwork makes a fully functioning whole. You are in charge of a widely
used ISP in one of the largest cities in the world and as such, you have
the same responsibility as any newspaper editor in the regard of FULLY
thinking out a policy of action wherein you consider how it affects both
society and individuals, today and in the long run. This is a relatively
new medium which is unbelievably dynamic and due to this dynamism, the law
(an ethical system) cannot keep up. Therefore, it is largely up to you,
and others like you to make a concerted effort to REALLY think about what
you're doing and why, in order to provide a viable online environment. 

I don't mean to belittle you in any way, or even say that what you are
doing is wrong, we all have our little areas of expertise (I'm sure that
you could kick my ass when I comes to computers) however, I very much
beleve that the world is quickly turning into the shit hole that we see
around us simply beccause people don't THINK about what they're doing.
People today seem to be comming more and more from some Machievallian
perspective and just do those things that serve their own agendas and/or
cover their own ass. If you come up with a solid and consistant REASON as
to why you shouldn't carry those groups, fine, I'll respect that. But as
of yet, you don't seem to have one and I think that this is a problem.

As to this post, respond, don't respond, I don't care. I'm sure that it
would be a huge inconvienience to entirely spell out your company's
ethical charter to some boob who has nothing better to do at 1:40 in the
morning than to write a treatise on online management. All that I ask is
that you spell it out to yourself and think about the things that you are
doing. It does matter.


Later,
-Chris

-- 
So, I'm a poor speller. Sew me.

Untie dyslexics! Untie!

GO BRUINS!!!!  GO ASTROS!!!!!
                                     _\\///_
                                    (' O-O ')
-----------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo-----------------------