From: veal@utkvm1.utk.edu (David L. Veal)
Subject: Re: Using killfiles is a form of censorship (was: Re: A Modest Request
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 23:09:48 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.180444.14954@Princeton.EDU> egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:

>In article <1992Jul25.162656.15672@athena.mit.edu> wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:
>>By the way, apropos to alt.censorship, I posted my original "modest
>>request" with motives that were about 90% utilitarian and 10%
>>experimental -- in addition to wanting to cut down on the time that I
>>spend manually skipping reply-to-Nigles articles, I also wanted to see
>>whether I'd get any negative "using killfiles is a form of censorship"
>>feedback... I'm gratified to report that I didn't.  Maybe things are
>>getting a little more sane around here.
>>
>>-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>

>Using kill files IS a form of censorship.  

     Censorship in the same way that when I pass a book in the Library which
I have no interest in reading (Zen and the Art of Basket Weaving?) I pass
it without reading it to go on and read something else.  I have left that
book alone, and welcome anybody else who wants to read it to do so.

     *i* make my choice, and it affects no one else.

>At the very least, it
>contradicts the professed dedication of discussants in the "Hate Speech
>Okay" thread like Mr. Starr to free and open debate.  Here's why.

>First of all, a metaphorical reference to murder is made in the
>description "kill" file, showing a suppressed rage and desire to "kill"
>one's opponent when one, like Starr, is bested in argument.  This
>suppressed rage is confirmed by the intemperate language used by
>discussants like Starr.  The very title of this thread, "A Modest
>Request" is an (unconscious?) reference to Jonathan Swift's "Modest
>Proposal" that the children of the 17th century Irish poor be fed to the
>English.  Partially Irish, I assure Mr. Starr that he will have to catch
>me and (non-metaphorically) kill me first.

     So the desire to not read your posts translates into a repressed
desire to kill you...  Hmmm...
 
     How do you feel about your mother?

>Discussants in the "hate speech" thread have professed dedication to
>free and to open debate, even when people from Viktora's victims to Kim
>Pring (harmed by Hustler) to Anita Hill (decried as a lunatic for
>bringing needed information re a Supreme Court nominee to the attention
>of the Senate Judiciary Committee) are all harmed.  Yet discussants
>including Starr themselves feel entitled to take refuge in "kill" files
>rather than participate in debate.  I suggest that no such refuge was
>open to Viktora's victims, Kim Pring, or Anita Hill.

     Indeed they didn't.  However, please note the vast difference in
environment.  

     It is not something I feel any need to climb up on top of a building 
and shout their praises over, but they certainly have the right to choose
not to read something they don't like.  It is only the format of USENET
which allows them to do so automatically.

>Now, "kill" files are a form of privatised censorship and they do not
>use a government mechanism.  

     Correct.  However, as opposed to most censorship, it is *voluntary*
censorship.  That being that the only person affected *freely accepts*
the censorship.

>However, this is merely an example of the
>libertarian illusion that if force (including the electronic,
>metaphorical use of force implicit in a kill file) is deregulated and
>privatised, it will disappear, and the libertarian amnesia re the social
>contract that gave government a monopoly (with restrictions) on force.

     The government does not have a monopoly on force, within or without
the social contract.  Go and read it.

>Anyway, I hope to have shown the the kill file is a form of censorship
>that gives the lie to the professed dedication to "freedom" that we so
>often see on boysnet.  And someone might want to pass the word to Mr.
>Starr that:

     Mr. Starr apparently has no problem with you speaking whatever it
is that is on your mind.  Nor does he have any problem with anybody
else reading or listening to you.  He has, however, exercised his right
to "leave the room" when you are speaking.  He has made his choice *freely*
as to whether to listen to you or not, and allows anyone else to *freely*
make their own choice.  His kill file affects no one but himself.


===========================================================================
|David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  University of Tennessee             |  
|                                     Division of Continuing Education    |
| Statistics are any data which can be twisted to support your posititon  | 
===========================================================================