At 13:24 30-1-02 -0600, Dan Minette wrote: > >Since it was clearly prompted by an argument with another list-owner, it >smacks of intimidation. > >I clearly agree with that. When only a few members of a group have the >power to kick anyone else out of that group, then they have a special >obligation to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. While it is >mathematically possible for it just to be a coincidence that a post in >response to Jeroen was picked out, I don't seriously believe it was a >coincidence. Does anyone else?
I doubt Eileen's post was in response to JDG's shouting. As I pointed out before, I believed that John was way out of line and consulted with the listowners to find out how they felt about it. There is no doubt in my mind that Eileen then went through JDG's posts to be able to make an informed decision. Rest assured that the listowners are NOT in the business of intimidation. >I find it especially bothersome that it happened within a couple of days of >Jeroen's "itchy finger" post. If he did contact Ms. Tan, then he >technically, _he_ isn't threatening to kick JDG off. I would not call it a threat, but a warning. Analogy: you get pulled over by the police because you were speeding. Since you and the police live in the same small town, you know each other. After having a talk with you about traffic safety, the officer tells you he will not write you a ticket this time, but if he catches you speeding again, there *will* be sanctions (in the form of a fine). Is the officer threatening you, or giving you a warning? >But if he did push the absentee list owner to do it I have not yet had the pleasure of meeting Eileen in person, but I have read her posts and I have often talked to her in the chat. I do not think she is the kind of person you can push around. :-) > >But I would not accept, and would not participate in, a forum that demanded >limitations on opinion >speech. I picked where I went to _college_ based >partly on that, I'm certainly not > > going to be in an internet discussion group that limits itself in such a > > way. > >I agree with that, but have a caveat. JDG's writings were clearly opinion >speech. I do not know who things are in the US, but over here we have placed a limit on free speech; we allow free speech, but draw the line at the point where it turns into grave insults. For instance, I can call someone an idiot or an asshole without being dragged to court for it. However, if I want to publicly call someone a Nazi or anti-Semite or child molester (to name a few), I better make sure I have the evidence to back my accusation. Jeroen _________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com Tom's Photo Gallery: http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com
