On Mon, 9 May 1994 Nick Laflamme <[log in to unmask]> said:
>
> Corollary:  the Chinese have very thoughtfully laid out a set of rules on
> what can be said in person and in public.  Are the rest of us supposed to
> consider our codes of human rights because the Chinese have so carefully
> defined their (lack of) human rights?
 
I do not have any points of view on Human Rights in China ( at least in
this forum ). However, it is implicit in your statement (and correct me
if I am wrong) that there is a need for standards (like in the UN). You
_will have_ to communicate with people from the entire globe. Or do you
expect them to accept both ASCII and the American Way ? (no flame).
 
> Are you claiming that EARN has legal grounds to deal with folks who don't
> belong to EARN member institutions?  Can EARN sue me for tacky behavior?
 
In US Court: Positive, Sir, from a legal point of view. However, why not
agree on an international standard ? What is so bad about having some
basic not-arbitrary laws ? (if we may consider international laws as
non-arbitrary).
 
> There are lots of effective codes of conduct which don't have a legal
> basis.
 
Good for what social/cultural/ethnic- group ? ;-)
 
The Cyberlaw & Cyberconstitution must comprehend almost everyone. Yes,
almost everyone. And the use of such a net must follow the Chart of
Human Rights (the ones who want to spread disinformation and racistic
PR may use the WC, please! :-| ).
 
> While life can be more fun when there is more agreement about rules and
> guidelines of social conduct, that doesn't change the fact that there
> fundamentally isn't a basis for imposing a code of conduct on the network.
> That you think there should be such a basis would not ipso facto mean there
> is such a basis.
 
Well, Sir. In such a case let the neo-nazis teach your kid about evolution
and socio-biology ;-). Or some say that Dachau never existed. Or perhaps
would you like some well known dictators to get hooked to send info (and
the .MIL has to scamble the thing to every one like during a recent war) ?
 
>
> If you want to set up the rules, you'd better set up a net where that's
> agreed upon.  In this Internet, there is no such agreement on a network-wide
> basis.
 
Why not take the step ? Scared of mind-control ? :-) Cold war's over, mate!
 
    AP