[Ron]
Well, who or what do you feel should be banned and why? 

[Arlo]
Again, I agree with social law that holds the "ball of yarn" accountable. I
support this because it is necessary for social stability. Some here did NOT
think this person (or any of his identities here) should be banned. My
contention was (and is) that it has nothing to do with his use of pseudonyms or
avatars or identities, but that there was a malicious intent to harm. And for
that I hold the ball accountable, even if I know the ball is a Gestalt illusion.

[Ron]
You maintain we should value the words not the identity. If they have no value
whats the harm?

[Arlo]
This is the difference between peaceable assembly and rioting. There was no
harm in dissent, no harm in disagreement, no harm in proposing alternate ideas.
But this person took it too far when deliberately tried to hurt others via
social ridicule. I don't feel like rehashing this in its entirety, you can look
up the dialogue in the archives. This person already got more "fame" than he
deserves, I don't intent to add more at this point. I bring it up only because
of your claim that I seemingly dismiss honesty and integrity. 

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to