🚀 go-pugleaf

Arthur D. Mira wrote:
> ...
> Over the years I've been amazed at the number of people whose sole
> interest and investment in the internet consists of nothing more than
> participation using freeware and shareware software (for which there
> has been no contribution) who seem to feel that that participation
> carries with it some 'rights' of internet, and in particular usenet,
> administration.

Does this mean that people using commercial software have those rights? 
Please explain why (only if you really believe this).

> ...
> If you don't like junk e-mail, or what shows up in usenet, then use
> software that allows you to detect and filter it...even if it means
> that you have to actually spend a few dollars.

Now how are you filtering it?  There is no foolproof way to do it, and
whatever limited systems there are, they need  constant updating and
administration.

> Freedom of expression and freedom of speech is a double edged
> sword, not a double standard. Before you start firing off too many
> missives to civil rights organizations, and encouraging others to do
> the same, take some time to think about whose agenda it is that
> you're promoting.

Anybody can put up a web site promoting his or her views (at least as
far as I am concerned).  Anybody who is interested can find and read it.
Stuffing my mailbox with garbaghe I am not interested in, or setting up
loudspeakers in front of my house to make sure I have to listen to
something I am not interested in is harassment, not freedom of speech. 
What would you think if 100 people forward all the junk mail they
receive to you?  Freedom of speech?

> Promoting censorship doesn't serve anyone purpose, and it just
> might come back to haunt you one day.

With your interpretation it could be argued that email filters are
censorship already

-- 

Hartmann Schaffer
Guelph, Ontario, Canada
schaffer@netcom.ca (hs)