Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

171Re: Censorship

Expand Messages
  • liquidmice
    Oct 27, 2004
      Well Mullins, you raise an interesting point... But, saying that the group is "censured"
      because it is moderated to remove spam is a bit like saying that banning pornography
      from kindergarten classrooms is violation of the first amendment. Just a (somewhat
      sarcastic) thought.

      In either case, your point is well taken. I never intended (or wanted) to `moderate' the
      group for spam. But, the reality is that we started to get it. I posted about the problem,
      and the few people that did respond suggested that the group be moderated. I'll do
      whatever the group prefers. I'm not sure if you looked at the group's posting history, but
      you are the first person to post in over three months. The group is slow going at this
      point. I really don't want to lose any of the few group participants we have because of
      recurring penis enlargement spams. If you have any ideas (or if anyone has any ideas) on
      how to best serve the group while solving spam concerns, please pass them on. For now,
      I'm the only person we've got to ensure "that no ones voice is stifled." And I promise your
      voice won't be stifled… unless you're touting the benefits of boob cream, hot teens who
      want me, or mortgage refinancing. But...uh... if the hot teens really DO want me, send me
      an e-mail ASAP.

      Anyway, thanks for the photos and links. Keep em coming. And special thanks for
      resurrecting discussion. Anything specific to say about Rushdie or his works?



      --- In salmanrushdie@yahoogroups.com, "finaldraft2000"
      <mdmullins@f...> wrote:
      > I understand the problem the group has been having with spam lately.
      > Still, does anyone find it a little ironic that messages are vetted
      > (moderated). Surely Rushdie would laugh. A group dedicated to one of
      > the staunchest supporters of free speech is censored. Mind you, I'm
      > not complaining, but perhaps there are other solutions. Is there a
      > we can maintain the spirit of what Rushdie stands for while keeping
      > spammers at bay; or is spam a price to be paid——allowing it,
      > tolerating it, and thereby ensuring that no ones voice is stifled?
      > thoughts or dissenting opinions?
      > MDMullins
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic