Took several times, and still was sloppy.But fortunately, or
unfortunately, that's kind of how I view things. Comes back to my
choice, as it comes to your choice. I am acountable for mine, or at
least feel that I am. And I've made plenty of bad ones for sure, but
that would be going totally off topic wouldn't it?
Btw, I still haven't taken care of the Safari problem. Haven't
gotten up the ambition to try a ree install yet. Might not, not
realy sure yet. Guess if I start having more trouble from more
websites than gmail, then might consider it. Still has something to
do with the folder iteself though, I've gotten my total free space on
hard drive back to over four gigs. Just cleaning out i tunes, and
there's still stuff that can be cleared out of there I'll bet.
But got same message at same place in the Safari install, so going to
have to do some more thinking, so if you all see and or smell smoke,
you know where it's comming from.
73s. On Aug 12, 2006, at 7:44 PM, Gabriel Vega wrote:
Tom:
in all honesty sir, that was a great email. I really enjoyed
reading it and am glad you look at the siituation in such a good
perspective.
Thank you for your thoughts.
Gabriel Vega
The BlindTechs Network
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: http://blindtechs.net
Phoenix (602) 476-2307 ext: 2863
Los Angeles (562) 261-5277 ext: 2863
Toll Free (866) 714-4244 ext: 2863
On Aug 12, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Tom McMahan wrote:
Hi Karen.
For the examples you wrote about below to apply fully, you would
have to be in a captive, or simi captive situation. Well, You
are where ever you are, and I am in my house. Thus I can control
what I listen to here, as can you, and stop reaching for that
deleet key!
But I think what I've said before still stands. It would be a
hard choice, but if it got bad enough here, I would make that
choice without a problem.
So Gabe is obnoctious,, I don't think he's threatened anybody here
yet has he? And since his business has beenmentioned to some
degree over the past few days, well, again, that's his problem.
He can choose to fail, just as he can make choices to encourage
success.
Right now, I am choosing to listen to the list in general, Since I
read my mail at least at the start one line at a time, it doesn't
take long for me to figure out if I want to read the rest of it or
not. I wish I could use a deleet key when I am out on the streets
or at stores, or basically out in public with some of the things
I've heard people say. That is realy being in the public. The
list is just cyber. Like the tv or radio you have control to the
greater degree of what you allow into your house or workspace if
your work allows you to do internet and e-mail. Some don't.
So when I'm out in public and I'm hearing someone carrying on in
a way I don't wish to hear, I can simply change direction, thus
"not listen." I still get some words of what was said, otherwise
how would I know that I should avoid them? Same here, only
faster, "deleet."
This still comes back to each one of us as an individual
regardless of what the list owner or moderators decide what to do.
I think though, I've just about said my piece on this matter such
as it is. Think we just see it a little differently. Think you
are able to pick up on the grays better than I do.
73s.
On Aug 12, 2006, at 4:47 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
Actually yes and no.
The constitution as interpreted via the Supreme court
jurisprudence does put some limits on free speech.
One of them was referenced before. Gabe's behavior might be seen
as unavoidable, and comparable to shouting fire in a crowded
room, where no one could escape his words.
The courts say that this, like burning an American flag at a
veteran's event is too provocative for protection.
Indeed there is no legal discussion about on-line services, and
indeed the list is privately owned.
But if the list owner feels that Gabe's behavior is costing him
traffic and it is, he would be within his right to either monitor
Gabe, my preference truth be told, or ban him all together.
Unfortunately we cannot really avoid listening as other folks
have pointed out.
Karen
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Tom McMahan wrote:
Oh he can shout all he wants to, but nobody has to listen. The
constitution says "Free speech" not "obligation that anyone has
to listen."
On Aug 12, 2006, at 12:02 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
Sad but true. Granted I prefer not censoring anyone's right to
free speech, and realize we are likely rewarding Gabe's obvious
poor sense of self, but even the constitutional legal history
has cases when you just cannot let someone shout what they wish
to the decrement of others.
Karen
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Josh de Lioncourt wrote:
> Karen Lewellen wrote:
> > NO!
> > do not do this. We need the wisdom of others, and leaving
does not > > solve
> > the problem. Perhaps blocking that address, so you still
get and con
> > contribute to the discourse here without the problem
postings?
> > Karen
> > > Hi Karen,
> > I certainly share your sentiment. The problem is that its
hard to avoid > Gabe entirely, as he's very good at stirring up
drama on the list. Even > if you block his address, you'd have
to block many others to avoid the > problems entirely. I really
do not want to see this community deteriorate > any further, so
I continue to urge everyone to try to contact the >
MacVisionaries administrators, as i have done.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
