"Alfred M. Szmidt" <a...@gnu.org> writes: > Note that even as you continue to bombard GNU with continually > repeated insults (yes, insults), there is no call to censor you, > and I can guarantee to you that Richard Stallman would not > countenance any such censoring, were he to express a view. > > Well, he would, he has expressed such views for other mailing lists > and considered removing one or two members appropriate. > > It would be only censorship if specific posts got through, not if all > posts by some members were to be deleted automaatically.
I don't think you'd even get RMS to join this absurd definition. Shutting a particular person out is censorship. When this person is posting excessive nonsense, usually crossposted to inflammatory groups with different content, under pseudonyms because he would not want to be associated with the sort of drivel he puts forth, then this censorship may simply be a necessary evil. You can't argue with people who _want_ to pick a fight. I'm somewhat ambivalent about putting "Rjack" off list distribution, but then he'll be sure to come back with a new pseudonym and more spite. Not much use in that. Terekhov is different. He actually puts his name on the line. And he apparently believes in his own drivel and weird mental jumps. Yes, he is out to deride the GNU project and the GPL, but at least he is serious about it. Ruling him off the list would not just be censoring provocation, but also hidden in all his provocation and however misguided, content. He has something to say, however wrong he may turn out all the time. Rjack hasn't. Shutting either of them off would certainly be censorship. But the cases are different. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss