"Strong" isn't the word I'd use, except perhaps in the sense of
"strong odor." That "movement" represents the rantings of a very
few crackpots who happen to have far too much time on their hands.
To paraphrase Douglas Adams: in an infinitely large internet such
as, for instance, the one we're using is turning into, most any
sort of kook one could possibly imagine, and a lot of kooks one
would rather not, crop up somewhere and have posting access.
> I also use a cancelbot, but only for mindless MMF spam
> posted to alt.union.natl-writers, as explained in my FAQ. As
> an absolute foe of censorship, I justify myself by arguing
> that "fraudulent or specious" appeals for money deserve a
> lower level of protection than other speech.
>
> I am beginning to wonder if I should reconsider and let any
> post, not matter how hostile, irritating, or irrational,
> stand.
No! Don't be sucked in by the sound and fury of the idiots.
The vast majority of people understand perfectly well that
canceling spam is not censorship. Spam is not protected free
speech, any more than sound trucks, handbills, or spray cans
are. Amplified announcements at 3 am are noise pollution and
a disturbance of the peace; handbills dropped from airplanes
are littering and (in the U.S.) an FAA violation; graffiti is
vandalism; spam is noise and is eminently, justifiably,
unapologetically cancelable.
Steve Summit
scs@eskimo.com
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved