strathspey@strathspey.org:27525

Oberdan Otto

Strathspey List CENSORSHIP (was Important (was: a Letter))

Sept. 26, 2001, 8:26 a.m. (Message 27525)

>As far as I'm concerned this takes the cake -- I'm fed up with this and
>won't have any more of it on this list.

This is, by the way, an ON-TOPIC post.

Somebody got Anselm REALLY angry.

The list needs an administrator. Anselm does a superlative job.

The list also needs someone who can enforce decorum and civility. 
Logistically, this must also be the administrator. I agree that 
anyone who is abusive should be summarily dumped from the list.

Then there is the person who talks about things we don't want to 
hear. Maybe these are off-topic subjects, but not necessarily! 
Because of its nature, the list naturally gravitates toward on-topic 
posts. Occasionally some threads have wandered off topic, but it has 
always wandered back. WE DON'T NEED A SUBJECT CENSOR. I'm sorry 
someone made Anselm angry. But anger is the wrong reason for invoking 
censorship.

I did not see the post that made Anselm angry because several months 
ago I set up a filter that deletes all messages from that person 
before they get downloaded. It is the only such Strathspey-related 
delete filter that I have. Unfortunately, the filter only partially 
protected me from those posts because OTHER people left copies of 
those messages in their replies. Most of those replies complained 
about insensitive and abusive language. The complainants don't seem 
to realize that the insensitive and abusive person will continue to 
be insensitive and abusive. The replies just egg the person on to 
more insensitivity and abuse. Set up a delete filter or use the 
delete key. Why subject yourself to harassment by reading the 
message??? Why give it any credibility or importance by replying???

Someone suggested that the Strathspey list belongs to Anselm. 
Technically that is correct. However, philosophically it is 
incorrect. Anselm is not responsible for the many well-presented 
posts on this list. He is also not responsible for the few really 
stupid things that get posted. He provides the framework, but he does 
not provide the content. We are responsible for the content and for 
that WE should be congratulated for a stimulating and relevant list.

Since September 11, I made exactly two medium-sized posts on those 
momentous events (peep). Including this one, I have also made two 
other posts recommending against list censorship. It appears that the 
great majority of the list would agree with the censorship that 
Anselm is imposing. Anselm did not invoke a democratic process to 
justify his action, but if he had, it probably would have supported 
him. But just because the majority wants something, that does not 
make it the right thing to do. The examples of democracy gone amuck, 
even in our SCD organizations, are far too numerous. Nonetheless, 
even if I am the only voice, I say without apology that this 
censorship is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

Now that just over a week has passed, the regulation time limit for 
somber subjects has expired, so it is time that we stopped talking 
about September 11 and went on to more important things such as 
whether to give right or left hand and which shoulder to pass in the 
middle of Mairi's Wedding.

Cheers, Oberdan.

P.S. Anselm, please note that I did utter a peep and based on your 
censorship pronouncement are now obligated to drop me from the list, 
conveniently silencing me!!!

184 Estaban Drive, Camarillo, CA 93010-1611 USA
Voice: (805) 389-0063, FAX: (805) 484-2775, email: xxxxx@xxxxx.xxx