Subject: Re: Sad (was Re: comments on i386 -1.2BETA snapshot)
To: Peter Galbavy <email@example.com>
From: Greg Hudson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/29/1996 12:44:18
[Whether this message is on-topic is questionable matter; arguably,
the list maintenance policy is always on topic for a discussion list,
but in many ways it's still "noise." Sorry.]
> Oh. So this is a confirmation of censorship of supposedly
> unmoderated mailing lists ?
I'm not sure where you got the idea that the NetBSD lists are
> In view of the debate regarding censorship currently underway in the
> UK I find this betrayal of trust rather hurtful, regardless of the
> reasons is happened.
Point one: Please distinguish between government censorship and
private censorship. The NetBSD core team does not have a monopoly on
discussion forums, or even discussion forums about NetBSD.
Point two: Censorship, although a word with generally negative
connotations, has always been a useful tool for maintaining the
quality of a discussion forum, when exercised by its recognized
moderators. rec.humor.funny exercises "censorship," as does
Point three: It's difficult to see this as a "betrayal of trust" given
the lack of a promise (that I've seen) that these lists would never be