Xref: utzoo soc.culture.jewish:8451 news.misc:2172 news.sysadmin:1735 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!yale!engelson From: engelson@cs.yale.edu (Sean Philip Engelson) Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,news.misc,news.sysadmin Subject: Re: Anti-Semitism (Jew-hatred) on the network. What should be done? Message-ID: <44387@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> Date: 30 Nov 88 04:51:48 GMT References: <1748YZKCU@CUNYVM> <577@oravax.UUCP> Sender: root@yale.UUCP Reply-To: engelson@cs.yale.edu (Sean Philip Engelson) Followup-To: soc.culture.jewish Organization: Computer Science, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-2158 Lines: 71 In-reply-to: harper@oravax.UUCP (Doug Harper) In article <577@oravax.UUCP>, harper@oravax (Doug Harper) writes: >In article <1748YZKCU@CUNYVM>, YZKCU@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (Yaakov Kayman) writes: > >[Mr. Kayman reports that he has forwarded "e-HATE-mail" originally] >[addressed to Nancy M. Gould to two "net.gods". He assesses it as] >[viler than a previous posting by Eric Mading concerning Douglas ] >[Ginsburg] > >>which drew widespread deserved condemnation and calls for the revocation >>of Mading's network privileges (his account was revoked on 10 Nov 87, >>and then was restored on 12 NOV 87). > >I found the reported remarks to be vile and racist, but I am dismayed >that Mr. Mading's account was revoked for his exercise of his >Constitutional rights. I'm glad to see that upon reflection, his >account was restored. [ elision ] >Can it be done? Perhaps. Should it be done? Never. >The expression of all views is protected by the Constitution. May I ask the esteemed gentleman in what Article or Amendment to our Constitution it is written that a man has the right to unlimited access and expression on the net? To pursue `reductio ad absurdum', do I then have the right to demand my right of free expression on the local television station to foment rebellion against the government of these United States? >Mr. Kayman, your urging of censorship is just as abhorrent as any >expression of racism. Please reconsider: accept your responsibilities >to this great country along with your freedoms in it. There will be >things said that you don't want to hear. You in turn will say things >that others don't want to hear. Let's all respect one another and >merely turn away when we don't like what's being said. > >I think you should show your colors, Mr. Kayman. Are you in fact >asking for censorship? Your posting can certainly be read that way. > >I deplore vicious personal attacks and hate mail. I strongly deplore >racism of all forms. Even more strongly, I love our freedoms under the >Constitution. > >The senders of electronic hate mail should be treated the same way the >senders of poison pen letters and the makers of harassing telephone >calls are treated. When they break specific laws, they should be >prosecuted. Punishment of specific offenses, not broad censorship, is >the answer. Prosecution was not called for, my dear sir. What was called for was that this incident be brought to the attention of the bigot's sysadmin, for him to deal with in an appropriate manner. It was not suggested that the man be thrown in jail. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sean Philip Engelson, Gradual Student Yale Department of Computer Science 51 Prospect St. New Haven, CT 06520 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The frame problem and the problem of formalizing our intuiutions about inductive relevance are, in every important respect, the same thing. It is just as well, perhaps, that people working on the frame problem in AI are unaware that this is so. One imagines the expression of horror that flickers across their CRT-illuminated faces as the awful facts sink in. What could they do but "down-tool" and become philosophers? One feels for them. Just think of the cut in pay! -- Jerry Fodor (Modules, Frames, Fridgeons, Sleeping Dogs, and the Music of the Spheres)