From: max@hitl.washington.edu (Max Minkoff)
Newsgroups: rec.music.gdead
Subject: Re: A Better Idea
Date: 7 Jan 93 11:54:35
Organization: /home/max/.organization
	<4472@unisql.UUCP>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.95.74.55
In-reply-to: wrat@unisql.UUCP's message of 7 Jan 93 00:35:52 GMT


In article <4472@unisql.UUCP> wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:

   In article <MAX.93Jan6123704@frabjous.u.washington.edu> max@hitl.washington.edu (Max Minkoff) writes:
   >Next time you feel like flaming someone publicly, instead of showing all

	   Why?  I mean, why _shouldn't_ someone express themselves ? 

There is a big difference, Lou, between expressing something that some
people may not want to hear and expressing something that is directly
hurtful.  Should I express myself by spreading lies about you?  Should I
express myself by publically embarassing you?  Should I express myself
by lighting a stink bomb in your office?  Should I express myself by
burning down your house?  I'd _never_ do any of these things, of course,
but I think you can see that not _all_ expressions are valid.


     Listen, I don't tell anal-retentive bozos prostituting themselves
   for the military-industrial complex not to make snide remarks about
   Secret Mailing Lists, do I?  Hell, no!  They've got a right to be
   obnoxious pinheads.  And *I've* got a right to flame 'em for it.

Actually, you don't, if you're referring to the First Amendment, Freedom
of Speech.  No, I'm not a lawyer, but quoting directly from an ACLU
Hypercard stack:

"Freedom of Speech does not protect conduct or actions that intimidate,
harass, or threaten a specific individual...

"First Amendment rights mean that you can express your point of view,
even if it is unpopular or makes people very angry.  However, acts of
violence are not protected by the First Amendment and can be punished
whether or not words are used."

I would take this to mean that while making remarks about a mailing
list, what the dead played or didn't play, or anything else that does
not directly relate to an individual are protected by the First
Amendment, but name-calling, abuse, threats, and general harassment
of an individual are not.  And that goes for all of us, not just Lou
Marco.  I don't know what impact the First Amendment legally has
on Usenet (but I doubt it will take long before it does), but if nothing
else, it's probably a pretty decent model, wouldn't you say?


	   It's like all those people who say "Bobby shouldn't sing
   *that*.  I don't like it".  You can always go to the bathroom until
   that part's over, ya know.

That's true.  But I can usually find something redeeming in the worst
(imho) dead songs, which is something I can't say for a large number
of your posts, unfortunately.  Hitting n doesn't really do it for me,
and doesn't help those on dead-flames.  Of course I could just put
you in my kill file (which means I'd never see any of your posts, for
those of you who don't know - I'm not threatening wharfie :-), but I'm
generally opposed to kill files - I don't like to make sweeping
decisions about what I do and don't get to see.  I'd rather you just
put a sock in it (again, only the personal nastiness - I enjoy the 
rest of your postings), or at least save it for any other e-communities
you participate in, if they condone such behavior themselves.

Thanks,

Max

Newsgroups: rec.music.gdead