Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!alberta!edm!steve From: steve@edm.UUCP (Stephen Samuel) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: Private networks and 1st amendments Message-ID: <212@edm.UUCP> Date: Mon, 30-Nov-87 13:19:20 EST Article-I.D.: edm.212 Posted: Mon Nov 30 13:19:20 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 2-Dec-87 01:37:25 EST References: <1151@looking.UUCP> <1561@van-bc.UUCP> Organization: Unexsys Systems Inc., Edmonton,AB. Lines: 44 Summary: they can post THRU but not FROM In article <1561@van-bc.UUCP>, sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) writes: > In article <1151@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes: > >This has been said before, but it seems to need saying again. This is > >a privately controlled network. Bills of rights, such as the 1st amendment > > .... > >for any reason, but I and any other system adminstrator can control access > >to our computers as we wish. > .... > possibility that we might not always have the *right* to restrict them in > this fashion. > .... > prevent or restrain others from doing so via your system. It's not too much > different if you kick them off your system or try and filter out their > articles as they pass through your site, it's still censorship. .... > through as another anonymous forwarder. If I kicked the person of he could > probably find somewhere else to get access. I think that we have two slightly different points here: One is censorship and the other is access to machines. While I would refuse (simply on the grounds of the time requirement) to even TRY to filter the volume of stuff that goes thru my system, I would not have any quams about throwing somebody of a system I administrated for consistently posting garbage to the net. If, at this point, he gets a machine somewhere doen the line from me then I would basically consider the situation to be out of my hands unless it got bad enough to cut the entire feed. (along with anybody else on that feed). Needless to say, I would consider action like that to be something of a last resort. What it comes down to is that while I feel that I do not have the right to censor anybody's articles, I DO reserve the right to cut a feed if there is good enough cause (whether that feed is a machine or a person). This is a self-limiting posture, because if you get a feed far enough away from me, I will have the choice of letting your message thru or cutting off most, if not all of the net. If I decide to make my system a hermit, that's my own problem. No matter what the case I would always consider cutting a feed to be a matter of last resort. -- ------------- Stephen Samuel {ihnp4,ubc-vision,seismo!mnetor,vax135}!alberta!edm!steve