🚀 go-pugleaf

kadie@cs.uiuc.ed (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

>>When resources are scarce, priorities have to be established. These
>>priorities should not, however, be used to removed material just
>>because some find it offensive. For example, if there are no resources
>>for "recreational" newsgroups, then both alt.sex and
>>rec.sport.football should go, not just alt.sex.

rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:

>So I suppose that a poorly funded program in phys ed must deny its
>football program access to rec.sport.football, just because it doesn't
>happen to have resources for alt.sex?

No ... in that case rec.sport.football would not be just recreational.
Similarly, at the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and
Reproduction, Indiana University-Bloomington, alt.sex would not be
just recreational. I'm sorry if my example was unclear or confusing.

[...]
>Wake up, Carl.  The world is a complex place.  There are many good
>reasons for limitations when resources are short.

... and many bad, no matter how many resources.

>But the reasons are local, so global solutions dictated by self
>appointed net gods will not do.
[...]
   
It is my hope that general principles based on academic and library
tradition and refined through discussion will prove useful to local
groups looking for solutions.

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
 =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =