LSTOWN-L Archives

LISTSERV List Owners' Forum

LSTOWN-L

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Paul di Virgilio COMPUMED <[log in to unmask]>
Mon, 9 May 1994 18:37:40 -0400
text/plain (62 lines)
>
> On Mon, 9 May 1994 17:14:11 +0200 Eric Thomas said:
> >Aldo,
> >
> >Let's face it, there is nothing you or  I or anyone else on this list can
> >do to bring  some order to the  Internet.
>
> Aldo, Eric is absolutely correct about this.  Besides technical nonconformity,
> people on the internet vehemently disagree over a number of ettiquette issues,
> such as should people be allowed to advertise?  You will not resolve issues
> like these.
>
> >It was built to  be chaotic and
> >exceeded its specifications  ;-) There is nothing you can  do about that.
> >On your list, however,  you can define the policy that  you want, and ask
> >people who  don't like it  to take  their discussions elsewhere.  And you
> >have the  means to  enforce it. People  are free to  set up  another list
> >somewhere else  if they're not happy.
> >
>
> This philosophy is how we operate our lists at USC.  Specifically, we maintain
> the lists at USC represent an investment of computer resources for the USC
> faculty or staff.  These are facilities available at USC for the benefit
> of the faculty or staff, which may include the facilitation of communication
> to people outside of USC.  (Every list must have at least one active listowner
> USC staff or faculty.  That person is given final authority on list content).
> If people on the list are not happy with this control over the list, they
> are free to obtain their own list software, and run their own list elsewhere.
>
> In other words, you are free to speak your mind anytime you want.  However,
> we dont have to pay for it.
>
> jr
> (john riehl)
> (CYA)
>
  I tend to support David Sitman in his appraisal of the situation.
  When I recommended the EARN document, I made 2 assumptions 1) that
  it was the product of consensus and 2) that it was readily
  available. David Sitman has provided a better address which will
  give you better answers. There is an ammendment to the United States
  constitution which states that freedom of speech does not extend to
  falsely screeming fire in a public place. We were trying to help a
  colleague solve a problem. Most of what I am reading here is an all
  too familiar xenophobia based upon silencing consensus by the same
  principle as screeming fire in a theater. By screeming prejudice
  where none was meant, the internet is buring up bandwidth which only
  furthers the ends of those who want to limit the accessibility of
  information by making unjustified allegations and comparisons
  between continents, groups, and services. I just received this
  address which will give you access to Secretary Brown's lastest opinion
  on the purpose of the information superhighway. It is called NIST
  Special Publication 857. Contact the National Technical Information
  Services, Springfield, Va. 22181, (703) 487-4650. Order by
  PB-163383. Media Contact: Anne Enright Shepherd, (301) 975-4858,
  [log in to unmask]
 
  Paul.
--
 
Dr. Paul S. di Virgilio,  University of Toronto  [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2