HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask)
Subject: Re: [soc.culture.indian]  DEADLINE TO STOP OBSCENE POSTINGS!
Reply-To: chrisb@seachg.UUCP (Chris Blask)
Organization: Sea Change Corporation, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 15:32:25 GMT

>In article <C0Au31.G41@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>>[A repost - Carl]
>>
>>From: dpereira@umiami.ir.miami.edu
>>Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
>>Subject:  DEADLINE TO STOP OBSCENE POSTINGS!
>>Message-ID: <1993Jan3.135844.14273@umiami.ir.miami.edu>
>>Date: 3 Jan 93 13:58:44 EST
>>
>>				MEMO
>>				----
>>
>>
>>TO:	Deepak Bose, Deb Chatterjee, Mustafa Ibrahim, anonymous obscene posters,
>>	others who post *really* obscene and offensive material
>>
>>FROM:	D. Pereira and others,
>>	Indignant and frustrated readers
>>
>>REF:	DEADLINE TO STOP POSTING OFFENSIVE OR RACIST MATERIAL ON 
>>	SOC.CULTURE.INDIAN
>>
>>
>>After Tuesday, January 5, 1992 at midnight, if I see *any* postings or replies
>>to postings that are offensive, racist or intolerable to me, I will forward 

Have to add my voice to the throng.  While I have seen some outrageous
bullshit on the net, racist, homophobic, stupid...  I do not think
threatening someone for speaking their mind (sick mind or not) is a
productive direction.  You only set precedents that will come back to haunt
you when someone disagrees with you.  Totalitarianism has been tried many
times and has not worked yet, I do not see how applying Orwellian logic in
the name of a good cause is better than doing it for evil.

-chris blask

"Freedom of speech means I can say the President's an Asshole if I feel
like it."

Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: soc.feminism editorial policy (was Re: I can't believe it!)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:00:01 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.023515.15819@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>
> My killfile has no effect on the nature of
>alt.feminism, which means that we can have numerous posts addressing
>(what I think is) the homophobic lesbian-bashing by Scheaffer.  I
>don't have to read him, but his posts and the followups have a
>distinct effect on the nature of the newsgroups (making it more
>confrontational and nasty, imo).

  Maybe the reason you're disappointed with the performance of your 
  world-class "killfile" is that the name of the obnoxious,
  homophobic, woman-hating, lesbian-bashing scum isn't spelled correctly.


-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!


     "Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that
      they are not even superficial."

                   - Friedrich Nietzsche    (The Gay Science: 126)
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9820 alt.privacy:2833
From: tsv@Unify.com (Tim Vannaman)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Censorship vs. Boycott
Date: 4 Jan 93 22:13:17 GMT
Organization: Unify Corporation (Sacramento)

In article <lkego7INNd05@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums) writes:
> In article <16B4AC5BF.UC445585@mizzou1.missouri.edu> UC445585@mizzou1.missouri.edu (John M. Kelsey) writes:
> >
> >   Some of you don't seem to get the difference between boycotting and
> >censorship, so let's try to make it real plain.
> ---
> 	You are right.  To resort to the dictionary on boycott:
> to abstain...from dealing with...as a means of coercion.
> 
> Coercion:
> 	to force to act of think in a given manner; to compel by pressure
> or threat; to dominate, restrain or control forcibly.
> 
> 
> As was stated before, censorship is the prohibition of some material
> that is objectionable.  We can see that a boycott is the use of 
> coercion to 'control' or 'force' someone to behave in some manner --
> in this case a boycott is a way to prohibit certain people from expressing
> their (unpopular) opinions.
> 
> 
> 	A boycott can be a means, and is in this case, to censor unpopular
> thoughts or opinions.  Anyway you cut it, it is censorship.  To argue
> otherwise is to try to create new meanings of words to suit one's
> purposes.
> 
> 
> >   I can't see a boycott ever being equated with censorship.
> --

Suppose someone says or reports something that you don't agree with or
don't think is fair (whatever).  They are in their constitutional right
to do such a thing and you decide you don't like it or don't think its
right (whatever) and decide to start a boycott.  

That is censorship because you are trying to force your OPINION (or 
BELEIF) on everyone else with the threat of the boycott.  You could
small companies out of business because of it.  You aren't censoring
them directly (you can't control what they say), but you can wipe out
the source altogether so they can no longer put forth things that you
don't agree with.


Tim.
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: [soc.culture.indian] DEADLINE TO STOP OBSCENE POSTINGS!
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 21:44:58 GMT

bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP (Austin Phelps) writes:

>kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>
>> be further penalized. (Some of the postings seen recently may even be used as
>> evidence for civil/criminal litigation.)
>> 
>
>Since when can a email message be used against someone in a court of law?
[...]

[An aside: I forwarded, but did not write the text Austin Phelps
attributes to me. But in answer to the question:]

(All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.)

=================
law/gates-v-brewer
=================
* Expression -- Harassment -- E-mail -- Gates v. Brewer

An excerpt from a newspaper article about email harassment. A judge
agreed that Bill Gates of Mircosoft had been the victim of harassment.

=================
faq/censorship-and-harassment
=================
* Censorship And Harassment
 
q: Must/should universities ban material that some find offensive
(from Netnews facilities, email, libraries, and student publications,
etc) in order to comply with antiharassment laws?
 
a: No. The federal courts have said that harassing speech is different
...

=================
=================

If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command
   gopher gopher.eff.org

These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred
method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp
to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4), and get file(s):

  pub/academic/law/gates-v-brewer
  pub/academic/faq/censorship-and-harassment

To get the file(s) by email, send email to archive-server@eff.org.
Include the line(s) (be sure to include the space before the file
name):

send acad-freedom/law gates-v-brewer
send acad-freedom/faq censorship-and-harassment

-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.culture.indian
From: bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP (Austin Phelps)
Subject: Re: [soc.culture.indian]  DEADLINE TO STOP OBSCENE POSTINGS!
Reply-To: bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP
Organization: The Matrix
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 08:45:20 GMT

kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

> be further penalized. (Some of the postings seen recently may even be used as
> evidence for civil/criminal litigation.)
> 

Since when can a email message be used against someone in a court of law?

Austin C. Phelps            pick a address: bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP
-> Tf3 <- elsewhere                         aphelps@vicstoy.oau.org
"Let history never forget the name          tf3@delphi.com
Apple II Forever! Alliance C373   Enterprise   AAWO 3303
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: glazier@isr.harvard.edu (Andrew Baker Glazier)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Australia gets it right
Date: 12 Jan 93 16:13:28 GMT
Distribution: alt.censorship
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

>>Now that you have a president who openly admits to having committed adultary 
>>AND having posessed weed, I'd say you were getting close to the starting blocks.
>
>		Not if Tipper Gore has anything to do w/ it,see what
>	she's already done to the record industry and now she has a
>	bit of power.

How much 'power' does the /wife/ of the VP really have though? I
sympathize, but what has she accomplished recently?

CORPORATE SST STILL SUCKS ROCK!!!!!
-- 
"A horse! A horse! Somebody give me a horse, man, because|glazier@ 
I come to bury this dirtball, not to praise him. Whaddya |harvard.isr.edu
think I am? Whether it's nobler for the mind to make people suffer with all
these totally outrageous arrows arrows for a fortune, or what!" -- D.R.
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.activism.progressive
From: leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker)
Subject: Re: I can't believe it!
Date: 07 Jan 93 07:26:51 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1993Jan6.144803.62497@cc.usu.edu> slt22@cc.usu.edu writes:
>     Get this, I was reading alt.feminism to see what the women were 
>squaking about and I came across a conversation about pornography.
>See, I don't mind pornography.  Hell, I even have a few mags.  
>They were saying that pornography was hurting the female spirit and 
>bitching about some other things about it.  My argument was that if you
>ban pornography just because you don't like it then you might as well
>ban nature shows on TV and magazines like National Geographic.  We, as 
>humans, seem to get this god-complex that everything that is so-called
>"Immoral" should be banned.  How far is this going to go?
>     Anyway, I send in my side of the story to the newsgroup and logout
>(it was late at night).  Yesterday I come back to the lab here and get on
>the newsgroup to see if I had started anything or to see if any followups
>were made.  Something odd happened.  I didn't see my post.  "Now that's
>kind of odd," I said to myself.  I thought that maybe it didn't get through.
>     But today, I log in and find that I had a new mail message.  Low and
>behold it was my post.  The response was "I found your letter to be 
>unsuitable for soc.feminism."  This surprised the hell out of me.  Talk
>about a censor!   I wrote a letter back to the moderator, who's name is 
>Cindy, and told her that this shows me how transparent feminism is.  They
>only want to hear their side of the story and no other.  Now I ask you, 
>is this a free country or what?  
>     We should learn to be more open minded and to stop trying to force
>"morals" on everyone.  As soon as one thing is banned, someone will find
>something else to complain about.  Pretty soon that will be banned.
>Besides, what someone calls "moral", someone else might consider it 
>offending and "immoral".  I think that it is time that the B.S. stopped
>and reinstate some freedom back in society without bans or complaints.
>You know what I mean?
>                                          -Thomas


-- 
Lee Daniel Crocker    | Free minds; free bodies; free trade.
leecr@microsoft.com   | Libertarian Party  1-800-682-1776
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,news.admin.policy
From: clayh@uum1.mn.org (Clayton Haapala)
Subject: Costs and service (was some Argic thing)
Organization: UNIX Users of Minnesota
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 23:09:12 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.214952.21986@walter.bellcore.com> cza@troy.cc.bellcore.com () writes:
>Paying for mail received, what a rip off!
>
>C, Akgun

If I have to pay LD charges to get the mail, I am paying SOMETHING to receive
it.  If I am using a local budgeted service -- same thing.  These are just
costs at the network transport level (uucp), not the application level
(like mail).  Easy to confuse the two or to forget one.  The $$$ all appear
on the bottom line, however.
-- 
Clayton Haapala (clayh@uum1.mn.org)
Mail Admin for MN.Org
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.culture.indian
From: aa@iti.org (Aayush Asthana)
Subject: Re: [soc.culture.indian] DEADLINE TO STOP OBSCENE POSTINGS!
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:17:51 GMT

bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP (Austin Phelps) writes:

>kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

>> be further penalized. (Some of the postings seen recently may even be used as
>> evidence for civil/criminal litigation.)
>> 

>Since when can a email message be used against someone in a court of law?
In the State of New York, a court upheld an e-mail message as
being equivalent to a signature.  I believe this was in a dispute
between a company's purchasing department and some supplier; the
supplier sent a routine blanket re-order note by e-mail; the
purchasing deptt. acknowledged the form but failed to respond -- the
supplier was awarded the amount --- or some such thin, the
acknowledgement was deemed to be a signature.

This has set a precedent; not sure if this is the beginning of a
whole new set of problems..


>Austin C. Phelps            pick a address: bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP
>-> Tf3 <- elsewhere                         aphelps@vicstoy.oau.org
>"Let history never forget the name          tf3@delphi.com
>Apple II Forever! Alliance C373   Enterprise   AAWO 3303
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.tv.simpsons]  Simpsons Illustrated -- BANNED IN OZ!!!
Followup-To: alt.censorship,alt.tv.simpsons
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 22:22:23 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

From: c8923075@mystra.newcastle.edu.au (Chris Baird)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.simpsons
Subject:  Simpsons Illustrated -- BANNED IN OZ!!!
Date: 5 Jan 1993 09:51:10 -0500


Well, sorta, almost; Australian Customs officials have detained a
shipment destined for the Aust. editors of "Simpsons Illustrated"
containing material for our Autumn '93 issue, until it gets the
okay from some random community pornography watchdog.

I'd been told the magazines's producers were pursuing less
conventional themes for a kids mag, but I never thought...

-- Chris Baird,, "Hey, my photo!"[7g10]
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,news.admin.policy
From: galt%peruvian.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Greg Alt)
Subject: Re: [news.admin.policy]  Re: (repost) Serdar Argic FAQ - everything you didn't want to know, but he replied anyway
Date: 4 Jan 93 11:41:34 MST
Followup-To: alt.censorship,news.admin.policy
Reply-To: galt%peruvian.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu
Organization: University of Utah, CS Dept., Salt Lake City

In article <C0938E.rz@cs.uiuc.edu>, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>I agree that cutting off a site because of content is wrong, but if
>a site is endangering the other sites of a feed (as anatolia is doing
>to the rest of mn.org) I would think that it would be entirely reasonable
>to cut off that site.  Along the same lines, it is reasonable to drop
>a user if that user is endangering the other users.  If you are poisoned
>by a snakebite and are told that you can either lose your arm or your
>life, why save the arm to lose the life?
>
>>(more importantly, if mn.org drops anatolia, the Argic postings till get
>>through uunet).
>
>But this will disassociate mn.org from anatolia, which would be a Very
>Good Thing (tm) for mn.org.
>
>anatolia would then have to pay for a mail feed, and will be more likely
>to curb serdar because anatolia will pay for all of the mail that will
>be fed back to it from the posts.  If anatolia wants to pay for the
>privilege of being flamed and mailbombed, then that's their business.
>
>But as I said earlier, I feel that posters *should* have valid email
>addresses where they can be reached.  If they are not willing to
>accept email, then they should not be a newsite.

I have no idea what sort of posts anatolia was making that resulted in
mailbombs, but dropping a site or even a user because of mailbombs sets
a bad precedent.  It says that if you don't like what someone says, send
them a few 20 meg mail messages, and they will never be heard from again.
If people are going to send big mailbombs, it makes sense to not have
an email address.

----
Join the Greg Alt boycott! Put /galt/h :j in your killfile today!
----
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: equnlivn@unix1.tcd.ie (Eoin P. O'Coindealbhain)
Subject: Re: Australia gets it right
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Distribution: alt.censorship
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 09:37:21 GMT

In <richardg.726752209@tcpsrv.syssup.tds.philips.nl> richardg@idca.tds.philips.nl (Richard Grear) writes:


>Now that you have a president who openly admits to having committed adultary 
>AND having posessed weed, I'd say you were getting close to the starting blocks.

		Not if Tipper Gore has anything to do w/ it,see what
	she's already done to the record industry and now she has a
	bit of power.
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: PORTLAND: American Front (Hate group) transcript
Date: 3 Jan 93 06:04:15 GMT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

hairy@sloth.equinox.gen.nz (Phil Anderson) writes:

> 
> In article <40RiwB1w165w@netlink.cts.com> bigbro@netlink.cts.com writes:
> 
>   > I beleive that kill files are somewhat of an annoying idea.  It seems to 
>   > me that it goes along with "Well if I don't hear it, it doesn't exist"  
>   > there are of course reasons where its use is completly justified, it just
>   > seems sometimes people use them for the same reason the fundies who are 
>   > on the school board at my school have for banning various medias, that I 
>   > should not be subjagated to what others think. Of course if someone is 
> 
> There's one vital difference - killfiles are a matter of _me_ 
> controlling what _I_ read, not me controlling someone else's reading 
> or someone else controlling my reading or anyone controlling what 
> anyone may write in the first place.
> 
> Does anyone who dislikes kill files get upset at the net being divided 
> into newsgroups? The same principle is involved - enabling people to 
> filter out what they don't want to read. I don't think it's reasonable 
> to say there's any censorship involved here; the right to speak does 
> not impose an obligation to listen on anyone.
> 
> There are many threads of discussion I'm not interested in, and many 
> posters who I can dismiss as uninteresting (to me) with a high degree 
> of confidence. Killfiles would simplify and speed up my newsreading 
> quite noticeably if they were available on my system.
> 
> Phil
> 
>  ----------------------------------------------
>  Phil Anderson  ***  hairy@sloth.equinox.gen.nz
>  ----------------------------------------------
>        "No-one is equal to anyone else!"

Yes that is a vital difference.  I never have claimed that kill files are 
censorship, because censorship would mean either the prevention of 
someone saying or doing something, or a punishment after the thing has 
been said or done.  However, on a personal basis,(which is why I tried to 
stick to first person in my post)I do not like them.  I also mentioned 
that they could be used as sort of a self-censorship.  The big vital 
difference is that it is self-censorship, rather than censorship to 
others.  Anyway I personally believe that ignorance is not strength, so 
the greatest acquring of any knowledge, true or false, right or wrong, is 
a basic goal for me, so that is why I, myself, find kill files to 
somewhat of an annoying idea, to me.

--                    
INTERNET:  bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!bigbro
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [alt.tv.simpsons]  Pornography charges against Simpsons Illustrated/Oz are dropped.
Followup-To: alt.censorship,alt.tv.simpsons
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 22:22:31 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

From: c8923075@mystra.newcastle.edu.au (Chris Baird)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.simpsons
Subject:  Pornography charges against Simpsons Illustrated/Oz are dropped.
Date: 7 Jan 93 13:35:08 GMT

Yours Truly put on his investigative reporter greens to uncover
the complete story,,

Customs officials mistakenly identified the package that arrived at
Sydney airport containing the `bromides' (for those who've yet to see
one, the films used in the production of the magazine are shipped in a
container ~90cm x ~90cm x ~9cm) as something used to transport movies.
And since there was no cinema classification on the declaration,
everything had be considered by `The Community Protection Group' to
see if Groening Inc. was attempting to sneak Europe's finest R-rated
movies into the country...

It took the CPG a few days to realise Customs had intercepted a
magazine.  Needless, the editor of SIOz is going to play the incident
for all its worth. >:)

Other information I procured from my source...

Australian companies have shown little enthusiasm in following the
North American Itchy&Scratchy merchandising bonanza; wisened by the
poor demand in the past for Simpsons stuff.  (Plus we hardly ever get
to see them over here, so the popularity of the cat and mouse is
significantly less here than elsewhere.)
						         |         |
But if you <must> have a genuine I&S T-Shirt,     ______/           \______
there are a few Collectors' import operations    /                         \
who could provide that service.                 /                           \
                                                |     |               |     |
--                                              |     |I survived the |     |
Chris Baird,, <c8923075@mystra.newcastle.edu.au>|     |alt.tv.simpsons|     |
                                                |     |  off-season   |     |
                                                |==O==|  discussion   |     |
                                                (     )    period     (     )
                                                 |||||                 |||||
                                                    /                   \
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9890 talk.politics.misc:66885 alt.privacy:2867 alt.sex:41418