William T Goodall wrote: > There are no 'technical or procedural' reasons for objecting to my > posts on the matter of religion: it's an attempt by some to silence > the expression of views they don't like plain and simple.
Are you kidding? This is entirely about technical/procedural objections! It's rude and against many internet taboos to re-post a referenced article in it's entirety to a mailing list, because it wastes everyone's time and bandwidth. If someone is interested in an article they can follow the link you send. But beyond rudeness it's a simple, clear copyright violation. The New York Times or Google News or whatever other source you've copied would be well within their rights under the law to scour the Brin-L list for William T. Goodall re-posts and require that they be purged from the archives. This isn't censorship in any form, it's basal crass commercialism: that article is worth money to them and you just ripped them off. Furthermore, this mailing list is not your personal de.licio.us/ma.gnolia/digg/google reader shared items feed for you to track interesting articles that you read in the news, this is a discussion list. If you want to start a discussion: start one. Make a point. Provide some commentary (and no, a single Maru line isn't exactly commentary). Better yet: Ask a question or two! Ouch, that may sound more hostile than intended, so let me bottom line it: I'm probably as anti-religious as you and I would say the same thing for any other poster that posted similarly useless, rude posts that don't fit the mailing list medium and would be better in some other environment such as the aforementioned "social bookmarking" sites. -- --Max Battcher-- http://www.worldmaker.net/ Don't Copy That Floppy or News Site Maru _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
