🚀 go-pugleaf

Dmytri Kleiner (dmytrik@syntac.net) wrote:

: On Thu, 2 Jul 1998 16:50:40 GMT, cr764@torfree.net (Kurt Wismer)
: wrote:


: The part of Marc's article that I quoted was:

: 	> I think what some people in this 'debate' fail to understand
: 	>  is that it is our right (and that of any member) to put a
: 	>  motion before the membership for  voting. Like it or not
: 	> (And obviously, some people do NOT like it very much) 
: 	> there will be an Acceptable Use Policy before the membership
: 	>  next AGM to vote on. 

: And I prefaced my response with:

: 	Fine and good, in that case I will make the following
: 	 statement of intent so that you all know what you are getting
: 	 into:

which doesn't say "this has nothing to do with marc's draft 
specifically", and since replying to marc's message does imply that your 
responce will have something to do with the meat of marc's message (which 
was not about aups in general but his draft in particular)...

yes he gives the impression that he's going to put the motion to the 
board come hell or high water but it comes down to this - he said what he 
was going to do, then you replied and said what you were going to do and 
you didn't make it clear that your actions would be conditional on 
something altogether different from what marc was going to do...

: >if you 
: >feel you need to make a point to censorious board members, then it would 
: >be best to reply to articles in which those specific board members made 
: >censorious suggestions...

: I have, do and will,

good...

: It was Marc's insistence that there *WILL* be a motion that I was
: responding to. If there is to be a motion, I would like all involved
: to know how I feel about the issue.

but marc was not saying there will be a motion, marc was saying there 
will be *his* motion... thus the misunderstanding about your responce not 
being to *his* motion...

: >marc got the impression you were directing your criticisms at him - and 
: >no wonder, you followed up his post and quoted his text when you did it...

: Even so, I fail to see how I have criticized *HIM*

you may not have, but you gave the impression that you were doing so 
implicitly by responding to his plans specifically and not explicitly 
stating that your position was a general one against censorship...

: I have expressed ideas that are different from his, but how that
: justifies being called a coward, a cretin, a terrorist, "worse than a
: KKK member", stupid, evil, and saying that he was "ashamed to know me"
: and speculating that I "sold my soul" not to mention  many other
: delightful smears, is not clear to me.

i imagine it was at least in part reactionary...

: What's worse, is that he immediately and repeatedly claimed my actions
: were "Illegal," and therefor actionable under the AUP he was
: presenting, meaning that his AUP could be used to silence me and the
: ideas that I am presenting.

my recollection is that he said it was illegal and actionable under 
canadian law (something to do with the corporations act)..

: His over-the-top hostility clearly demonstrates that if such an AUP
: were in place he certainly WOULD HAVE used it to punish me, claiming
: he was upholding the law. 

: Forcing *ME* to *PROVE* that my actiones were *NOT* illegal.

i don't see how he can silence you... you post from outside tfn, tfn only 
has authority over itself... the only punishment i could see coming about 
is the possibility of having you convicted in a court of law - which 
would mean that you really did do something wrong and deserve punishment...

: I guess "innocent until proven guilty" is not a concept that we wish
: to preserve in this new medium.

he's questioned the legality of your actions to date, he hasn't silenced 
you or convicted you... he's exercised *his* freedom of expression and 
voiced his concern...

isn't that the kind of medium you were looking for? where people can say 
whatever they like as long as they don't break the law?


-- 
"do as i say not as i do because 
 the shit so deep you can't run away
 i beg to differ on the contrary
 i agree with every word that you say"