Newsgroup: it.discussioni.animali
Titolo: Bonsaikitten: la risposta del webmaster

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/bonsaikitten
1) Bonsai Kitten is real and it's cruel.
This is just not true, for any number of reasons. A kitten's bones are
no different from those of any other mammal. The phone number on the
site is not real (a reverse directory search reveals that there are two
instances of the phone number 662-7544 in New York, neither of which
occur in Manhattan's 212 area code). Never mind that many of the various
containers described on the site (Never mind the 4D Klein bottle) have
openings which are either non-existent (Antagonistic Hound, Sphere etc.)
or not of sufficient size to insert the kitten (German Cylinder, Conic
Cylinder etc.). All of this is in addition to the fact that the original
creator of the site is no longer the host. Bonsai Kitten is now hosted
by Rotten.com, who I am quite sure are not in the business of selling
Bonsai Kitten paraphernalia.
Based on the fact that very few people continue to press this issue, I
think that Bonsai Kitten has probably been widely accepted as a
satirical work with no basis in reality.
2) OK, so it's not real. Bonsai Kitten should still be removed from the
web because it may cause someone to replicate the process described
therein.
There are a number of problems with this argument. First of all, I
believe we have established that the procedure outlined in the web page
is impossible to follow. The first step is to obtain a Bonsai
Kitticulture license from the government; something they simply will not
provide you with as it does not exist. If someone were to attempt to go
ahead with this procedure without the license, they would soon stumble
across the numerous impossible to use containment vessels on the web
site. OK, so they continue with one that will work, they now need to
obtain the calcium-sequestering agent. As you can see, anyone with an
inkling of common sense should realize shortly that this will not work.
As for the argument that a child might not follow this line of though
and still try this, I say: You show me a child resourceful enough to
obtain the materials after failing to do so from the Bonsai Kitten
website, and I'll show you a child who is smart enough to know better.
All of this is secondary; however; to the fact that the removal of any
written or recorded work due to the potential for laws to be broken as a
result of said work is censorship. Notice the distinction between laws
being broken in the process of writing or recording the work (As is the
case in Child porn or Crush videos), and the potential for laws to be
broken as a result of reading or viewing it (As with Bonsai Kitten, or
GodHatesFags.com etc.).
This point seems to be somewhat less prevalent as of recently. I would
hope that this is an indication that most people have also accepted
this.
3) OK, but still, isn't there a possibility that someone is so
ridiculously ignorant that they might still attempt it? I think Bonsai
Kitten should put up a disclaimer or be held responsible for any
attempts to make a Bonsai Kitten by its readers.
All right, now we're getting into some of the gray area surrounding this
matter. I think that this is really two separate points, but it seems to
get grouped together like this so here we go. First off, regardless of
whether or not a disclaimer were present, if someone were to actually
try this, they are the ones who should be held responsible - not Bonsai
Kitten. To imply consequences for the author of a work, based on the
impact that the work may have on its reader is a form of censorship. Can
you imagine living in a society where you have to be careful of
everything you say because someone might take it out of context and
interpret it as an instruction to commit a crime? Should we jail J.D.
Salinger because Mark David Chapman was partially influenced by "Catcher
in the Rye" to kill John Lennon? I think we can all agree that the idea
is ludicrous.
This being said, there is no reason for the webmaster to add a
disclaimer if he or she does not wish to. You may argue that a
disclaimer would make sense from an ethical standpoint, but I think that
a disclaimer would take away from the impact of the sight as a social
statement (Yes, I believe Bonsai Kitten to be just that.). Additionally,
based on the fact that there have been no reported cases of an attempt
to replicate this procedure, and the fact that it is extremely unlikely
that there will (Especially in light of all the recent media coverage,
which all makes sure to point out that Bonsai Kitten is fake.) I think
that we can safely live without it.
And finally:
4) You guys are a bunch of sick fucks.
On this point, I think we can agree.
--
robert...@inferentia.it
tesista in Inferentia SPA
Fatti non fummo per viver come bruti
yellow ribbon 
bonsaikitten.com
 campaign

 tesista in Inferentia SPA
 Fatti non fummo per viver come bruti
ma per seguir virtute e conoscenza....
:-)))