i guess dan drank too since he apologized.
His cracking under pressure doesn't really address the issue.
Galileo recanted too.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy,
At 10:12 AM 8/5/2008, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In order for secularism, whatever in hell THAT means, to be a religion,
it must have some set of relatively well-settled articles of faith which
have been organized into a more or less formal, and, in any event,
The government is not supposed to be sticking a wetted finger into the air
every hour to see which way the popular wind is blowing.
Read the Wikipedia article on The Wisdom of Crowds
It will make you feel better about all this.
Or maybe worse.
Yeah, I know about that. However, the crowds twice elected a certain
individual whose name I won't mention but whose initials might include the
letters G, W, and B. In my view, this fact disproves the entire premise.
Read the Wikipedia article on The Wisdom of Crowds
, August 05, 2008 10:21 AM
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] Puritans at the helm...
The government is not supposed to be sticking a wetted finger into the
air
every hour to see which way the popular wind is blowing.
Read the Wikipedia article on The Wisdom of Crowds
In all this talk about the definition morality, I've always found it
interesting how groups use their own definition of it to justify their
cause.
This might not have made the national news but
Perpetrators must be stopped using whatever means necessary, and the
use of force is a
whatever means necessary
People just need to jet their extreme-o-meters properly calibrated.
Anyone using phrases like that scores 100.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
**
Yeah, I know about that. However, the crowds twice elected a certain
individual whose name I won't mention but whose initials might include the
letters G, W, and B. In my view, this fact disproves the entire premise.
Lots of money was expended on feeding the crowds misinformation and the
press
What's the frequency Kenneth!!
-Original Message-
From: Computer Guys Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Piwowar
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 1:13 PM
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] Puritans at the helm...
Yeah, I know about
You mean getting canned for using known false docs to get ratings? Then
getting outed within minutes by people who use those fancy computer things?
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lots of money was expended on feeding the crowds misinformation and the
You mean getting canned for using known false docs to get ratings? Then
getting outed within minutes by people who use those fancy computer things?
OMG you drank the KoolAid.
*
** List info, subscription management, list
i guess dan drank too since he apologized.
On 8/5/08, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mean getting canned for using known false docs to get ratings? Then
getting outed within minutes by people who use those fancy computer things?
OMG you drank the KoolAid.
Is this to say the censoring of anything only comes from the religious?
City council in LA just banned the building of any new fast food restaraunts
in poorer sections. Cities and counties across the US ban smoking in public
and private areas...I don't think there is any religious basis
All societies set their own morals/ethics by majority opinion. Our
federal government is supposed to reflect that choice by the laws it
passes. This is not always the case and people may disagree with it.
No they do not. Judicial opinion probably has the greatest influence.
That system has a
Robert,
As a fellow secularist, I have to point out that this type of
confrontational arguing serves to discredit us in the eyes of most US
citizens. Please try a different approach.
--JE
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Robert Michael Abrams [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
...
By the way Morals/Ethics do not equal public law.
Now understand I am talking about this and looking at this as a
Sociologist would.
How the everyday person looks a this is a confusion of all the above
terms and realizations.
Stewart
At 08:25 AM 8/4/2008, you wrote:
All societies set
By the way some would view secularism as its own religion.
Stewart
At 09:07 AM 8/4/2008, you wrote:
Robert,
As a fellow secularist, I have to point out that this type of
confrontational arguing serves to discredit us in the eyes of most US
citizens. Please try a different approach.
--JE
Right..censorship cause it's good for you! Why is it good for you? Cause
we decided it is!
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this to say the censoring of anything only comes from the religious?
City council in LA just banned the building of any new fast
Interesting you should mention that.
The Aztecs used tobacco in their society for religious and medical
purposes. (I am watching the History channel!)
Stewart
At 11:58 AM 8/4/2008, you wrote:
So we ban fast acting poisons, but allow slow acting poisons? What is the
dividing line between
On Aug 4, 2008, at 9:43 AM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
Unfortunately we have two (Executive and Legislative) that do not
seem to be able to make any decisions without consulting public
opinion.
Our current Executive branch seems to be completely unconcerned
about consulting with
On Aug 4, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
By the way Morals/Ethics do not equal public law.
Is this the same as the Ollie North Defense?
Steve
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules,
Nope groups have a tendency to set their own more's which get
translated into morals which individuals accept as ethics. These are
not always in congruency with the laws of the land.
Take for example the area of the country I live in.
For decades and even for a century the mores of the group
At 11:44 PM 8/3/2008, mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this to say the censoring of anything only comes from the religious?
I was addressing the forms of censorship that Stewart was discussing.
Those are, for the reasons I described, motivated by religious beliefs, on
the one hand, and
At 08:16 PM 8/3/2008, Rev. Stewart Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have a problem with organized religion.
What problem is that, Stewart? Please enlighten me. I happen to ADORE
both the free exercise and establishment clauses of the First Amendment.
Your right and my right to
Our federal government is supposed to reflect that
choice by the laws it passes. This is not always
the case and people may disagree with it.
I disagree with the supposed to part. They have a
number of democratic ideals, and a number of
constitutional provisions, to answer to, so, and
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Robert Michael Abrams [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
You are correct about the fairness doctrine, it has nothing to do with
censorship but rather a free market vs government regulated market.
Mike
I don't understand the point you are making, since the fairness
At 03:57 PM 8/4/2008, mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are correct about the fairness doctrine, it has nothing to do with
censorship but rather a free market vs government regulated market.
I disagree, Mike, because of your use of the term market. The legal
philosophy in this country,
At 07:07 AM 8/4/2008, John Emmerling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Robert,
Bob, please.
As a fellow secularist, I have to point out that this type of
confrontational arguing serves to discredit us in the eyes of most US citizens.
No, it doesn't. And, even if it did, how would you
At 07:14 AM 8/4/2008, Rev. Stewart Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By the way some would view secularism as its own religion.
Which just goes to show you how desperate some theocrat wannabes can get.
In order for secularism, whatever in hell THAT means, to be a
religion, it must
I would not have it say for every pizza hut pizza I order via the net I have
to order a peter piper pizza. I would prefer both able to equally enter the
arena of selling me pizza, and based on taste or price or form/speed of
delivery, and in turn allow me to choose which pizza I eat, how often or
From: Robert Michael Abrams
OK. I'll go from confrontational to vulgar: I'll tell
them to suck my balls.
Mega-dittos!
-Bert
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy,
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Rev. Stewart Marshall
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By the way some would view secularism as its own religion.
And some view Creationism as science.
Neither view can stand on its own, not being self-consistent.
--
John DeCarlo, My Views Are My Own
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sociology 101 Morals = Ethics.
In practical terms, ethics have guiding principles, while morals have no
need for a basis or any consistency. Thus, morals are more often associated
with religion than anything
At 03:43 PM 8/4/2008, Chris Dunford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Our federal government is supposed to reflect that choice by the laws it
passes. This is not always the case and people may disagree with it.
I disagree with the supposed to part. They have a number of democratic
ideals, and a
Lessened a bit, but not lifted.
On Aug 2, 2008, at 5:47 PM, mike wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/02/china.internet?gusrc=rssfeed=technologyfull
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules,
Censoring content is not part of our agenda. We are in
compliance with applicable Federal regulations with regard
to common carriers.
Pardon the broad brush. Not all telecoms are evil.
This week the FCC told Comcast that they were bad boys because they were
inspecting their customer's packets
Do you think the FCC will react to such impudence with the same fervor
as they applied to a wardrobe malfunction?
Of course not.
Common carriers' needs to maximize profits at the expense of the consumer
are perfectly in line with the current government's standards for Protection
of Corporate
Can everyone here do me a favor and quit bashing religion.
I don't see that happening here. Perhaps you are reading something into
comments that are more than what was intended? This sometimes happens
when a sore spot is being discussed.
What I'm seeing bashed is religious extremism. Religious
Japan is decidedly not a Christian society (I think everyone can agree
on this) Yet they have some strict moral standards on what is allowed
of a sexual nature.
I think after a little bit of research the Rev. would want to withdraw
this example.
Most of the censoring being done on the Internet right now is not
religious based but content based on protecting Children from stuff
they should not have (Because some folks do not want to show or
exercise any restraint) and also to protect our children from being
exploited in a sexual
Qwest only offers usenet with their premium package..which is 45.99 or
something per month for 1.5 megabit. Under this premium price you also
get...wait for it...ONE pop account for email. Cox a couple of years ago
took usenet to the woodshed and dropped the retention rate form more then a
week
Do you think the FCC will react to such impudence with the same fervor as
they applied to a wardrobe malfunction?
I do not know and I can not predict what the FCC decides.
I am about the business of transporting voice and data.
If you pay me I will do it and I guarantee it will be reliable.
They do not want their children to see this. (Hence my earlier quesion
about Kill Bill or The Passion of the Christ -- which is being
evaded.)
I am not a film critic. But Kill Bill was not Quentin Tarantino's best
movie to date. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't as good as Reservoir Dogs,
the
I am not a film critic.
In our context the issue with both Kill Bill or The Passion of the
Christ (and many other films, I picked these two at random) was
excessive, graphic violence.
Should children be allowed to see such stuff?
Sex vs torture?
Who's values?
Tom I will not argue with religious extremists are dangerous at every
turn. I know I am pilloried by my own church body, but I am not
above regulation so that extremists can be persecuted and
curtailed. (My firm belief is that any freedom will eventually be
turned into an abuse real fast by
Nope they do censor sexual stuff. Not to the extent that we do. We
tend to outlaw all of it, but they only outlaw explicit
content. (i.e. no penetration etc.)
Plus the % of Christian's is nil.. Their main religion is ancestor
worship. (Shintoism)
Stewart
At 10:56 AM 8/3/2008, you
Been there done that.
I also happen to agree with sister.
America tends to follow the traditions of the conservative Reformed
traditions which believe in regulation by the church through
government. (I a oppose this)
Check out John Calvin's experiment in Geneva in the 1500's.
Also their
Actually this wasn't in our context till you changed the context. It was
not children being protected from pornography or some kind of violience
pornography but rather the right to post children IN pornography. You seem
to be arguing for that very thing until the rubber hit the road and you
You picked the movies at random? You watched them, right?
No, assuming that I had children I wouldn't permit them to view
these movies.
That would be my responsibility as a parent.
As an adult and a citizen I can watch any material I please.
And I can do it without governmental restriction,
Beginning:
At 08:22 PM 8/2/2008, Rev. Stewart Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can everyone here do me a favor and quit bashing religion.
No. When religion deserves not to be bashed, people, generally
speaking, I predict, will stop bashing it. But this is America, Stewart.
You're
Conclusion:
China which is not a Christian nation has a very strict moral code on what
is allowed and what is not. I can give you many examples out there.
I don't think there are any examples to give. Just because you, or
they, call it a moral code doesn't make it one. Particularly
Sociology 101 Morals = Ethics.
Stewart
At 09:37 PM 8/3/2008, you wrote:
Morals are set by society.
No, they aren't. Morals and society have nothing to do with
each other. Morals, even assuming such a thing exists, color the
way someone, individually, deals with himself, how he makes
Ethics, however, are very much a creature of society, etc.
Good essay, try to cut that son of a bitch down to five sentences,
please. We all ready know most of this.
Eschew obfuscation.
*
** List info, subscription
Sociology 101 Morals = Ethics.
Not exactly. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at
I can only account for myself, not others just as I would expect you
to account for yourself and what you do.
Yep. I am on the same boat as the Reverend here but I am not sure
where we are going. This boat looks a lot like a handbasket, come
to think of it...
Note third use and also see Websters #2
Stewart
At 10:21 PM 8/3/2008, you wrote:
Sociology 101 Morals = Ethics.
Not exactly. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
Rev. Stewart A. Marshall
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org
Ozark, AL SL 82
And to quote a very conservative radio broadcaster there is a
shortage of hand baskets.
Stewart
At 10:35 PM 8/3/2008, you wrote:
I can only account for myself, not others just as I would expect
you to account for yourself and what you do.
Yep. I am on the same boat as the Reverend here
At 07:43 PM 8/3/2008, Rev. Stewart Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sociology 101 Morals = Ethics.
Extant mammals = Unicorns. I gave you examples of clearly unethical
behaviors that might have been moral, assuming morals exist, but, rather
than consider them on their merits, such
At 08:54 AM 8/1/2008, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The bluenoses are merely looking for some way to justify hating you...
I is not at all limited to sexually explicit material.
I agree completely with you, which uses up my Agreement With Tom
quota for the decade, but I only
-Original Message-
ISP's are shutting off USENET because of Andrew Cuomo, Secretary of
State
for New York State.
Ah, the proud New York tradition of electing power mad, publicity whoring,
thuggish assholes as their Attorney General. (He is actually the AG, not
the SoS)
As opposed
Which groups are those? Isn't this logic the same as driving around looking
for homes with 'we make meth here' signs in the yard? I realize the alt's
are a wild west and being wild, blocking xyz groups means they move to abc
groups and post.
I've not much hope if you are serious with the
I've not much hope if you are serious with the 'censorship is always wrong'
comment.
Censorship is always wrong. Just go back 100 years or 200 years to
examine some bit of censorship with the benefit of not being caught up in
the moment. At best you will see it is absurd. More likely you will
Indeed..so we should allow the posting of 50 year old men having sex with
nine year old boys? Free speech no matter what? If that were true we would
have no laws about libel or slander. I suppose we should repeal those laws
as well. Civilized society would be much more...civilized.
Mike
On
In the news today we have reports of China's decision to block parts of
the Internet from visiting journalists. These are mainly political views
being blocked.
I've never seen that done in the United States.
Well no, this is a Capitalist society. Here blocking is motivated by
profit motives.
Holy crap...I agree with Tom again. Earthquake? Fire? Flood? Locusts??
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the news today we have reports of China's decision to block parts of
the Internet from visiting journalists. These are mainly political views
being
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/02/china.internet?gusrc=rssfeed=technologyfull
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at
Holy crap...I agree with Tom again. Earthquake? Fire? Flood? Locusts??
Summer cicadas?
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/02/china.internet?gusrc=rssfeed=
technologyfull
Ultimately this is good push back. Exposes them to the civilized world.
Ultimately McCain will agree that 18 months is not a bad deadline.
Ultimately IT managers will admit that Microsoft sucks.
Indeed..so we should allow the posting of 50 year old men having sex with
nine year old boys? Free speech no matter what? If that were true we would
have no laws about libel or slander. I suppose we should repeal those laws
as well. Civilized society would be much more...civilized.
What do
I hope these two are not dependent on one another.
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ultimately McCain will agree that 18 months is not a bad deadline.
Ultimately IT managers will admit that Microsoft sucks.
I'll wait for your reply on my question, I'll answer yours in the movie
listserv.
Mike
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Indeed..so we should allow the posting of 50 year old men having sex with
nine year old boys? Free speech no matter what? If that were
Tom Piwowar wrote:
Indeed..so we should allow the posting of 50 year old men having sex with
nine year old boys? Free speech no matter what? If that were true we would
have no laws about libel or slander. I suppose we should repeal those laws
as well. Civilized society would be much
At 02:32 PM 8/2/2008, mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Indeed..so we should allow the posting of 50 year old men having sex with
nine year old boys?
Interesting image. How/Why did you come up with it? Have you ever
actually seen anything like that? Do you know anyone who has? How can you
When the ISPs remove a service that has been included in their package
of services, what's the odds that they'll reduce the monthly/yearly
charges?
I remember back in the good old days when I was in grade school, we read
my best friend's church newsletter every Sunday, starting with the back
Well no, this is a Capitalist society. Here blocking is motivated by
profit motives. The telecoms lie to us about how expensive it is to move
electrons and seek to block services they see as a threat to their
ability to overcharge.
Well, it isn't that expensive to move electrons but it costs
As opposed to power mad, publicity whoring thuggish assholes in the
White House?
No, in addition to that. Do you have trouble envisioning both, or just ones
with a (D) next to their name?
or in the Alabama or Mississippi state houses?
Mississippi has more problems than that. Like a state
Can everyone here do me a favor and quit bashing religion.
Morals are set by society. Any society has a sense of morals, and
taboos set by what the community standard is. (There may be a basis
in a common religious background, but even diverse religious
backgrounds can agree on moral
Comcast is no slouch in the child porn fight: it helped organize an
industry-wide agreement last week with 45 attorneys general.
I was required to conduct training on this issue for my employees.
It wasn't comfortable for anyone but I did it and that satisfied
the requirement.
I have no doubt
The bluenoses are merely looking for some way to justify hating you...
I is not at all limited to sexually explicit material.
In the news today we have reports of China's decision to block parts of
the Internet from visiting journalists. These are mainly political views
being blocked.
We have
ISP's are dropping USENET completely now also...i wager at the request of
the same who are wanting p2p shut down.
Mike
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The bluenoses are merely looking for some way to justify hating you...
I is not at all limited to
the home depot in oxon hill has had signs and cameras for about 6 months. they
have cleared the loiters out of the store so they no longer approach customers
when shopping, however, during any weekday, there are 20 to 30 day laborers
loitering on the edges of the lot.
they also have a single
ISP's are shutting off USENET because of Andrew Cuomo, Secretary of State
for New York State.
From the Wikipedia article on Cuomo-
On June 10 2008 Cuomo, then New York Attorney General, announced that three
major Internet service providers (Verizon
-Original Message-
ISP's are shutting off USENET because of Andrew Cuomo, Secretary of
State
for New York State.
Ah, the proud New York tradition of electing power mad, publicity whoring,
thuggish assholes as their Attorney General. (He is actually the AG, not
the SoS)
They don't need to shut down the alt newsgroups, or block binaries
actively...just do what cox and qwest do, have a retention rate of about 48
seconds.
Mike
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 1:42 PM, John Duncan Yoyo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
ISP's are shutting off USENET because of Andrew Cuomo, Secretary
In the news today we have reports of China's decision to block parts of
the Internet from visiting journalists. These are mainly political views
being blocked.
I've never seen that done in the United States.
*
** List
Wasn't that settled by Potter Stewart who said, I can't define it but I
know it when I see it!! ...not many are aware it was a case of a certain
piece of film (which was shown in the supreme court chamber) ...Stewart
further added, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.
At 06:49 PM 7/31/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wasn't that settled by Potter Stewart who said, I can't define it but I
know it when I see it!!
I don't think anyone with an adult level of cultural and
sociological sophistication (which, if you trust most of the opinions of
those who
They seem to have some trouble with the idea that, in the United
States, you ought to have some freedom to think, say, and do things that
chap somebody else's ass.
Yeah, as long as their exercise of rights doesn't infringe mine.
I may not agree with a particular dogma but as far as I'm
22 public interest groups roast FCC smutless broadband plan
By Matthew Lasar | Published: July 29, 2008 - 08:55AM CT
They may not agree on net neutrality or the Fairness Doctrine, but
almost half a dozen advocacy groups from liberal to libertarian do
concur on one issue: they hate Federal
Those pathetic, ignorant, repressed souls can buy filters for their own
computers, and can also take the time to study the Constitution.
Unconstitutional and unwise only scratches at the surface of their
problems!
Well, I agree with you in theory. As an employee of a common
carrier and a
90 matches
Mail list logo
