🚀 go-pugleaf

Randy Wittchen (wittchen@direct.ca) wrote:
	(hack, snip, buzz)

: Hi

: Absolutely right.  

: Private companies can take whatever actions they wish and impose terms
: retroactively should they so wish subject to criminal sanctions, civil
: liability or consumer protection legislation.  Most likely the original
: subscription agreement allowed such action as most ISP agreements allow
: for termination at the complete discretion of the ISP without the need
: for cause.

	ummm.  this would appear a non-sequitur.  vcn stands for 
vancouver community net(work).
	as such, it is not an isp.  it does not levy fees per say.  it 
solicits donations (although, i believe in this case a mandatory donation 
is required for membership).
	under such circumstances, it is possible the shareholders (read: 
the membership) may have demanded the suspension or deletion of the 
account in question.
	my feeling on the matter is this would appear a knee-jerk 
reaction and the complainant should have been left open to the (social) 
consequence of their actions (there surely were counter - arguments 
posted to the hate messages - if not, the greater community would appear 
more closed than one would normally expect).
	if vcn is to maintain common carrier status, this will indeed 
hurt their case in future.  and likewise others who act on content alone.

	(snip)
--