On Oct 16, 2008, at 1:21 PM, David King wrote: > If blip didn't allow it, they'd be a censor - and who'd trust them > then? > Better to allow McCain/any one else you don't agree with to air > their views > and let the people decide what's good and what's not.
agreed. on the other hand, most hosting sites censor to some degree, no? at least with respect to their terms of service. for example, I don't think blip goes in for porn (or is there a filter setting I don't know about) archive.org might be an exception. certainly they remove things when they must comply, but I don't think they tend to censor. markus [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
