On Apr 18, 2021, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely....@gmail.com> wrote: > Dave didn't say who he thinks should or shouldn't be moderated,
Shall we ask him to confirm what I read between the lines? Shall we ask Nathan? Shall we ask you? > it would be silly to suggest that you should not be allowed to post > here, given your track record I happen to disagree with the underlying premise, that my opinion should be any more legitimate or welcome because of my modest contributions to the project. Besides the implied chaste system that I've already objected to in the previous message, the approach you suggested amounts to regarding people as guilty until proven innocent. I support the opposite alternative, the one prescribed in the declaration of human rights and adopted in most civilized societies, that recommends people to be regarded as innocent until proven guilty. I find systems in which people are not welcome by default, but rather need to first earn a baseline of respect that every human being ought to be entitled to, are the opposite of welcoming, and the unchecked powers needed to implement them are too prone to abuse. I've seen such powers being abused, and I've found that absolutely intolerable. Plus, there's a cautionary principle that I subscribe to, that it's preferrable to find 10 guilty parties not-guilty and let them go free, than to treat one single innocent party as guilty. > so why do you think he said that those he agrees with are > welcome to share their opinion? Mainly because of timing, threading and general disposition. Even if he didn't state it expressly, it has not been hard to tell. I'd welcome certainty instead, either way. Whose messages would you prefer to have had the power to filter out, or that whoever did had filtered out from your view? Nathan, how about you? David, how about you? > Are you projecting maybe? I doubt it. I don't find myself wanting or calling for people to be prevented from expressing their opinions, no matter how much I disagree with them, or how much I find they may be undermining what I stand for with their stance. I do notice, however, when people call for suppression of dissenting voices, on arguments that apply equally or even more strongly to aligned voices, but that did not motivate calls for suppression on the same grounds. It's not even like I have to actively search for such patterns, asymmetries jump out at me and catch my attention. -- Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/ Free Software Activist GNU Toolchain Engineer Vim, Vi, Voltei pro Emacs -- GNUlius Caesar
