🚀 go-pugleaf

On 30 Jun 1998 19:33:20 GMT, dragnet@internalysis.com (Marc
Bissonnette) wrote:

>>My own security is not my primary concern here, I am acting with my
>>convictions and therefore believe that no harm will come to me.
>
>>This may be a naive point of view, but it has served me well all my
>>life.
>
>You're right, that is naive.

Well, as I said it's a policy that has served me well all my life.

Maybe you don't understand what Che meant when he said it better to
die than to live on your knees, I guess that sort of thinking only
makes sense to us "Cowards" -- Well my ass is not as bad Che's, I
would not put by my or anybody else's life in jeopardy over the TFN,
but I would certainly risk legal trouble to uphold freedom and
justice.

>>More bluster, Marc, your credibility is fading fast with these kinds
>>of patently inaccurate statements.
>
>No, it is not. The only person who questions my 'credibility' is you, and I'm 
>really not concerned with that.

I'm afraid your rabid delirium has clouded your vision Marc, I don't
see your point of view getting much support. Thankfully.

You're credibility is done like diner, I encourage anybody who thinks
Marc is making good points in this debate to post their "Bravos!" for
his rather eccentric performance up now.

We're waiting... 

Don't hold your breath Marc.

>>I am trying to prevent a small group of control freaks from taking
>>freedom of expression of the membership hostage by setting their up
>>their own little kangaroo court.
>
>Again, dmytri, read the AUP written in one of Canada's two languages. There is 
>NOTHING about censorship in there. You're a cheap martyr who has not even 
>checked to make sure that you're carrying the correct cross.

Establishing a policy where the board can, without due process,
jurisdiction, qualifications, or accountability deem an action
"illegal" and discipline the user with impunity qualifies as
censorship in my book.

>>>This is nothing short of despicable and reprehensible.
>>
>>Despicable, reprehensible... it's only a matter of time before Marc
>>calls me stinky and says I have the kooties.
>
>I have no care or concern for your personal hygene. Your actions are despicable 
>and reprehensible.

No Marc, you've gotten yourself into some kind of hysterical hissy fit
and have lost all sight of the issue being discussed.

>>Lynch mobs are despicable Marc, attempting to give yourself the power
>>to silence people is despicable Marc.
>
>Show me where lynch mobs were even hinted at, you hyppocrite. Threatening the 
>TFN, it's volunteers and supporters is a form of lynch mobs threatened by 
>yourself. Hyppocrite.

Establishing a policy where the board can, without due process,
jurisdiction, qualifications, or accountability deem an action
"illegal" and discipline the user with impunity qualifies as a lynch
mob in my book.

[much drivel snipped]

>>I remind Marc, that although I have stated my position clearly, I have
>>not personally attacked anyone, and although some of the ideas that
>>have been promoted are views that I find very offensive and vile, I
>>have made every effort to avoid mud slinging.
>
>You have attacked the TFN, it's supporters and it's volunteers by threatening 
>to 'destroy them in any way possible'. Don't forget to wash under your nails 
>when removing that mud.

No, I have threatened to attack the invasion of the body snatchers
like pod-entity that will have destroyed and replaced the TFN should
it abandon it's role as a vanguard of free speech and justice.

Virtualy the same threats I was making after L'Affair Allisat when I
was *ELECTED* in the first place.

>>My self-glorification? My martyr act? Funny coming from a guy who's
>>jumping up and down screaming "Extortion!" "Blackmail!" and patting
>>himself on the back with noises of moral judgements and pantomimed
>>disgust.
>>
>>Please justify either statement.
>
>They have been (repeatedly) justified in many posts in this and related 
>threads. If you have a problem with the english language, I suggest an ESL 
>course.

These statements have been served up by you at every sitting, dressed
with piss and vinegar and briskly tossed with deranged fervor, but
none of this constitutes justification.

Thank you for your suggestion of an ESL course.

>>I am acting on my beliefs, from a position of strength, not attempting
>>to gain sympathy for any kind of victimization.
>
>You are victimizing the TFN membership by attempting to disallow them to vote 
>on their own needs, wants and desires. 

Bullshit, Marc... (from another message)

[...]

And you know as well as I do that a tiny percentage of TFN members
actually vote in elections, but even if all members voted and all
members supported a censorious motion, I would still be forced to act
against censorship, even if was "democratically" supported.

What if the membership of TFN passed a motion requiring immediate and
forceful circumcision for all female members, should I just shrug it
off and say "democracy?"

>>The FreeNet is a community service with a resonsibility to uphold
>>freedom of speach and be a vangard of justice in the new media. It has
>>a very important role to play in the evaluation of a very important
>>new medium.
>
>
>You still don't get it. There is nothing in the AUP that affects freedom of 
>speech, excpet to reinforce the fact that we fully support it.

Establishing a policy where the board can, without due process,
jurisdiction, qualifications, or accountability deem an action
"illegal" and discipline the user with impunity qualifies as something
that affects freedom of speech in my book.

Respectfully,