From: sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth Bradley)
Subject: Re: Censoring John Dinardo ... Restore his access
Keywords: Censorship, Conspiracy Theory
Organization: Intel Corporation
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 16:18:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.202950.20884@uropax.contrib.de> ots@uropax.contrib.de (Rudolf Stoert) writes:
>this is the first time I read alt.conspiracy and I am quite perplexed to read
>that someone has been shut down. Then I read the couple of infos which had been
>posted by John DiNardo - and I am even more perplexed.
Your perplexity would vanish if you bothered to read news.announce.newusers.
 
>> No one is "forbidding you to speak the truth". All they're saying is that you
>> should go find your own machine to post it from.
>I see. Simply stupid. What does he expect to be censorship? A Russian soldier
>with a gun behind you? In contrast Henry Hardy pointed out:

From news.announce.newusers (highly recommended reading for anyone on Usenet,
even more highly recomended for those who complain about how its "run").
Please pay special attention to item number 4:

WHAT USENET IS NOT
------------------
 1. Usenet is not an organization.

    No person or group has authority over Usenet as a whole.  No one
    controls who gets a news feed, which articles are propagated
    where, who can post articles, or anything else.  There is no
    "Usenet Incorporated," nor is there a "Usenet User's Group."
    You're on your own.

    Granted, there are various activities organized by means of Usenet
    newsgroups.  The newsgroup creation process is one such
    activity.  But it would be a mistake to equate Usenet with the
    organized activities it makes possible.  If they were to stop
    tomorrow, Usenet would go on without them.

 2. Usenet is not a democracy.

    Since there is no person or group in charge of Usenet as a whole
    -- i.e. there is no Usenet "government" -- it follows that Usenet
    cannot be a democracy, autocracy, or any other kind of "-acy."
    (But see "The Camel's Nose?" below.)

 3. Usenet is not fair.

    After all, who shall decide what's fair?  For that matter, if
    someone is behaving unfairly, who's going to stop him?  Neither
    you nor I, that's certain.

 4. Usenet is not a right.

    Some people misunderstand their local right of "freedom of speech"
    to mean that they have a legal right to use others' computers to
    say what they wish in whatever way they wish, and the owners of
    said computers have no right to stop them.

    Those people are wrong.  Freedom of speech also means freedom not
    to speak.  If I choose not to use my computer to aid your speech,
    that is my right.  Freedom of the press belongs to those who own
    one.

-- 
Seth J. Bradley, Senior System Administrator, Intel SCIC
Internet: sbradley@scic.intel.com   UUCP: uunet!scic.intel.com!sbradley
----------------------------------------
"A system admin's life is a sorry one.  The only advantage he has over
Emergency Room doctors is that malpractice suits are rare.  On the other
hand, ER doctors never have to deal with patients installing new versions
of their own innards!"  -Michael O'Brien
From: Mark.Prado@p2.f349.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Mark Prado)
Sender: Uucp@blkcat.UUCP