My Dear Evan

 

Maybe I have misunderstood all the emails sent on this and other lists against my suggestions that people adjust tone (not substantive content, note)  - if the At Large as represented by some on this list  is  all for freedom all the way to offend, threaten, libel and abuse, why then try to censor others? Or is it one rule for you, another for others?

 

I personally have NEVER had a problem with content, once it’s accurate. The article is accurate, those things were said at the Board/ALAC meeting. It might have been mischievous, might have been snide, but there’s no law against that. There was no threat, no abuse, no personal attack in the article, unlike some emails on this list.

 

I have no idea where you got information about 3 people being suggested for censure owing to a pursuit of “free and frank discussion”. I have sent email strongly  requesting that they desist from a particularly libelous and threatening manner to only ONE person, and yes, in that case I did say “I’d hate to have to moderate you, but I will if people continue to complain”. The particular issue ended, there were no more complaints and no moderation was needed.  I’d love to know who the other 2 are and who suggested censure in the pursuit of “free and frank discussion”, as opposed to censure in reaction to perceived threats, abuse and personal attacks.

 

FYI, I was informed by Darlene at one time that the NARALO list was actively moderating posts from a member. There’s not been any moderation on this list.

 

Jacqueline

 

 

WE are for free and frank discussion after all

That's a very odd assertion given the recent history of this forum, in which three separate people have been suggested for censure simply due to their pursuit of "free and frank discussion".

One person's "free and frank" may easily be another person's insult, especially in a forum such as this with high levels of cultural diversity. What is most amusing in this context is not the defense of free speech, but rather its apparently selective application.

I personally found the meeting description in the communique to be highly inaccurate, unprofessional, and indeed misunderstood about the very purpose of At-Large. And, yes, as a participant in that meeting I found the description very insulting. Having said that, I greatly appreciate Nick's apology and am happily prepared to move on to more important matters.

  "What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist." -- Salman Rushdie

- Evan

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.14/1100 - Release Date: 10/30/2007 18:26