On Friday, June 18, 1999 9:05 am, Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com> wrote:
> In a message dated 99-06-17 21:30:44 EDT, email@example.com (Harvey
> Newstrom) wrote:
> > Just to clarify, I have not prepared anything other than postings that
> > appeared on this list. I'm not sure which of these postings rises to
> > level of "indictment" or why ExI would need anybody's help in
> > who has posted what to this list. Greg seems to be expanding the
> > process of moderating the mailing list into full-blown court drama.
> I apologize for the use of a word, Harvey that is very much in the idiom
> my personal and professional life. Let me note that in fact what you and
> Jeff did was very much, however, in the spirit of private law enforcement
> that at least some extropians are quite interested in.
> [long explaination snipped]
Greg, I agreed with everything you wrote. However, I think you missed my point. I don't object to the terminology. They way you wrote it sounds like I am working behind the scenes with you to get people banned from this list. I have been receiving a lot of hate mail because of this. I wanted to make it clear that I have not communicated with you. When I tried to clarify this, your response says that what I did was very much in the spirit of private law enforcement. I don't know what I did.
Please tell me specifically what you are referencing. Please clarify to the rest of the list that I have not submitted anything to you directly. Anything you have you have grabbed from my postings on the list. I don't see how I could have helped anyway. To enforce your ban, you need to look at what each person has posted. I have no idea how my postings could help you look at other people's postings.
You seem to keep implying that you couldn't or wouldn't be able to ban people from this list without my help. I want to be clearly on the record as being opposed to subject bans and opposed to unsubscribing people for the topics of their discussion. People should only be banned for their behavior.
> As for having a "full-blown court drama", let me offer some brief
> observations about the process. Libertarians (in the most general sense
> the word) need to be flexible. When you condemn authoritarianism, you
> necessarily have to embrace the fact that social systems should be able to
> respond flexibly to evolving facts. As a result, due process becomes a
> high value to libertarians.
That may be. But you are simply being asked to enforce list rules as a moderator. I don't see that you have to set up a court, receive indictments, or take a week to make decisions after the fact. As near as I can tell, ExI originally announced that they would enforce a ban on the gun topic. It now appears that you are implementing a "neutral" court under the guise of PPL, and are put the blame on indicting people on me or others. You are the moderator. ExI is the list owner. If you people unsubscribe people, it is not because of any indictments from me.
Again, please confirm to the list:
-- Harvey Newstrom <mailto://firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://newstaffinc.com> Author, Consultant, Engineer, Legal Hacker, Researcher, Scientist.