uncensored newsgroups?
Meg Worley
>My ISP does not carry most sex oriented NGs and it seems to me that it is
>excluding left leaning NGs. Though it seems to have no problem carring
>racist NGs.
Berkeley's excluding the left-leaning newsgroups and carrying
racist ones? Stop, stop, you're slayin' me.
Rage away,
meg
--
m...@steam.stanford.edu Comparatively Literate
Marc B
excluding left leaning NGs. Though it seems to have no problem carring
racist NGs.
John Rudd (yes, that's really my email address)
>
> Marc B <marc...@uclink4.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> >My ISP does not carry most sex oriented NGs and it seems to me that it is
> >excluding left leaning NGs. Though it seems to have no problem carring
> >racist NGs.
>
> racist ones? Stop, stop, you're slayin' me.
>
He said his ISP, not his university. He may only be using uclink for his email.
Though, some universities also exclude certain newsgroups so that they can't get
caught with some charge of distributing pornography on government owned
resources, or even charges of sexual harassment (hostile atmosphere) from female
students or staff. Yet, not carrying racist oriented groups carries the
'stifling free speech' claim. It's one of those annoying contradictions of our
legal atmosphere.
Marc B: are you talking about your ISP, or about Berkeley.edu?
--
John "kzin" Rudd kz...@domain.org http://www.cygnus.com/~jrudd
Truth decays into beauty, while beauty soon becomes merely charm. Charm
ends up as strangeness, and even that doesn't last. (Physics of Quarks)
-----===== Kein Mitleid Fu:r MicroSoft (www.kmfms.com) ======-----
Meg Worley
>> >My ISP does not carry most sex oriented NGs and it seems to me that it is
>> >excluding left leaning NGs. Though it seems to have no problem carring
>> >racist NGs.
>> Berkeley's excluding the left-leaning newsgroups and carrying
>> racist ones? Stop, stop, you're slayin' me.
John writes:
>He said his ISP, not his university. He may only be using uclink for his email.
That's why I included the bit showing that he was posting
from Berzerkeley.
>Though, some universities also exclude certain newsgroups so that they can't get
>caught with some charge of distributing pornography on government owned
>resources, or even charges of sexual harassment (hostile atmosphere) from female
>students or staff. Yet, not carrying racist oriented groups carries the
>'stifling free speech' claim. It's one of those annoying contradictions of our
>legal atmosphere.
I'm almost positive that isn't going on at Berkeley. He
must be complaining about some other ISP.
Russ Allbery
>> Though, some universities also exclude certain newsgroups so that they
>> can't get caught with some charge of distributing pornography on
>> government owned resources, or even charges of sexual harassment
>> (hostile atmosphere) from female students or staff. Yet, not carrying
>> racist oriented groups carries the 'stifling free speech' claim. It's
>> one of those annoying contradictions of our legal atmosphere.
> I'm almost positive that isn't going on at Berkeley. He must be
> complaining about some other ISP.
Same here. His description of the policies of his ISP don't sound like
Chris at all.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Clayton D. Strand
email address)" <us...@domain.org> wrote:
(( cuts ))
>Though, some universities also exclude certain newsgroups so that they can't get
>caught with some charge of distributing pornography on government owned
>resources, or even charges of sexual harassment (hostile atmosphere) from female
>students or staff. Yet, not carrying racist oriented groups carries the
>'stifling free speech' claim. It's one of those annoying contradictions of our
>legal atmosphere.
Why is it "stifling free speech" when racist oriented newgroups are
not carried, and not when sexually oriented newsgroups are not
carried? Why not just brand the racist groups "pornography" and be
done with it? This will solve the "annoying contradictions" in our
legal atmosphere, right?
Dave
cdst...@cpsidfw.com
http://www.cdstrand.com
Jay Denebeim
Clayton D. Strand <cdst...@cpsidfw.com> wrote:
>Why is it "stifling free speech" when racist oriented newgroups are
>not carried, and not when sexually oriented newsgroups are not
>carried? Why not just brand the racist groups "pornography" and be
>done with it? This will solve the "annoying contradictions" in our
>legal atmosphere, right?
Feel free to use the local bell tower or bomb the local federal
building. Although, I'm afraid you'll find your 2nd ammendment rights
have already been curtailed before they started going for the 1st.
Jay
--
* Jay Denebeim Moderator rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated *
* newsgroup submission address: b5...@deepthot.aurora.co.us *
* moderator contact address: b5mod-...@deepthot.aurora.co.us *
* personal contact address: dene...@deepthot.aurora.co.us *
Clayton D. Strand
Denebeim) wrote:
>In article <37b73699...@news.remarq.com>,
>Clayton D. Strand <cdst...@cpsidfw.com> wrote:
>
>>Why is it "stifling free speech" when racist oriented newgroups are
>>not carried, and not when sexually oriented newsgroups are not
>>carried? Why not just brand the racist groups "pornography" and be
>>done with it? This will solve the "annoying contradictions" in our
>>legal atmosphere, right?
>
>Feel free to use the local bell tower or bomb the local federal
>building. Although, I'm afraid you'll find your 2nd ammendment rights
>have already been curtailed before they started going for the 1st.
Why would I want to do this? Personally I have no stake in either
circumstance except as a matter of principle, and, as you say,
principles have been so compromised to this point it would indeed be
pointless to do anything other than to point out the extreme silliness
of the policy of the ISP involved, and, in fact, the American Legal
System.
Curtis Chewbacca Desjardins
> Though, some universities also exclude certain newsgroups so that they can't
> get caught with some charge of distributing pornography on government owned
> resources, or even charges of sexual harassment (hostile atmosphere) from
> female students or staff. Yet, not carrying racist oriented groups carries
> the 'stifling free speech' claim. It's one of those annoying contradictions
> of our legal atmosphere.
When I was at the University of Waterloo many moons ago[1], there was a big
stink about the university censoring all of alt.* from the newsfeed for
"lack of resources" (or whatever excuse they used). Someone called them
on it, there were student debates[2], and finally alt.* was restored, minus
the groups they wanted to censor in the first place[3], of course (IIRC,
alt.evil, and the bestiality groups).
[1] circa '89
[2] I still have one of the protest buttons:
"Alt.*: Not just common sense, it's university policy"
[3] Any UW alums here know what the newsfeed status is now?
Curtis.
(send PRIVATE EMAIL to pa...@net.co.kr; all other email set to /dev/null/)
=============================================================================
Alright! I *AM* the Messiah! --- He *IS* the Messiah! --- Now... Fuck Off!
=============================================================================
Rick Pikul
"Chewbacca" Desjardins) says...
> 2-4-6-8, John Rudd is spiffy, John Rudd is great!:
> > Though, some universities also exclude certain newsgroups so that they can't
> > get caught with some charge of distributing pornography on government owned
> > resources, or even charges of sexual harassment (hostile atmosphere) from
> > female students or staff. Yet, not carrying racist oriented groups carries
> > the 'stifling free speech' claim. It's one of those annoying contradictions
> > of our legal atmosphere.
>
> When I was at the University of Waterloo many moons ago[1], there was a big
> stink about the university censoring all of alt.* from the newsfeed for
> "lack of resources" (or whatever excuse they used). Someone called them
> on it, there were student debates[2], and finally alt.* was restored, minus
> the groups they wanted to censor in the first place[3], of course (IIRC,
> alt.evil, and the bestiality groups).
Actually everything was put back, then alt.sex.* was cut and then
restored. Finally, to make it look like the administration was doing
something about complaints from the 'womyn's center'[I], five newsgroups
were cut:
alt.tasteless
alt.sex.bestiality
alt.sex.bondage
alt.sex.stories
alt.sex.stories.d
But the binary partner groups to the first three were left.
> [3] Any UW alums here know what the newsfeed status is now?
No alt.binaries, and some other groups are gone from selected
servers (e.g. news.math dropped the rec.games groups). All bets are off
for the CSC's machines.
[I] According to the official list of UW organisations, there is
no such entity. There is however, a Woman's Center.
--
Phoenix