Folks, this is why we don't debate list rulings on the list - the intramural tail-chasing takes over.
Please move on to real city issues. Everyone is dying to express themselves; you can do it within the rules, and as for this discussion, you've all been cautioned... David Brauer List manager > > I'm more concerned with Mr. Graham's use of the "shot at" anaology. > He stated several times that he felt a public figure was ripe for > being "shot at." With the violence seemingly ruling this society, > more and more frequently, all over, locally and globally, I would hope > that we can utilize language that does not encourage violent thought. > <snip> > What is this world coming to when semantics are taken as a threat on > someone's life. We beat this debate to death in the Hodges/Samuels > issue that crossed the line from free speech to an attempt to charge > Hodges with a crime. If saying constituents can "take a shot" at a > political figure on this forum is construed as a death threat, what is > this world coming to? Mr. Graham was clear about verbalizing an > opinion in his post, and in no way made the reader believe that he advocated violence. That is just ludicrous. REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
