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of Mading's network privileges (his account was revoked on 10 Nov 87,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 Mading's account was revoked for his exercise of his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)