Re: Censor John Gilmore -- EFF is a disgrace!

["George A. Stathis" <hyperlex@hol.gr>]

At 05:51 �� 17/11/1996 -0500, Tim Scanlon wrote:
>George A. Stathis wrote:
>> This was my objection also inside the F-K list, for _some_ of the postings
>> in the past, but none of these postings was connected with acts of
>> censorship, or with "sweeping generalisations" without evidence. On several
>> occasions that I searched and found who or what they were talking about,
>> I discovered they were talking about people whose activities were indeed
>> horrifying (forged cancellations etc) and who also fought back.
>
>Horrifying eh? Hmm I found this just a bit to priceless to resist.
>I guess it falls under the old 'but I'll defend your right...' way
>of looking at things...
>
>In any case, here you go, this is the latest contribution of software
>from Dimitri to the values of freedom of expression and non-censoring
>& all that blather.
>
>#From Phrack 49, file p49-09 published this month:
>                            .oO Phrack Magazine Oo.
>
>                        Volume Seven, Issue Forty-Nine
>                        
>                                 File 09 of 16
>
>                          by Dr.Dimitri Vulis (KOTM)
>
>               A Content-Blind Cancelbot for Usenet (CBCB)
>
>And what follows, is Dr. Dimitri, defender of freedom of expression,
>champion of the anti-censors on the net, posting code to the world to
>engage in exactly those activities that everyone has been ranting about
>as being so utterly "horrifying (forged cancellations etc)" as it were.
>
>Amusing to say the least.
>
>Tim

Well, this is why we _NEED_ this discussion; we _NEED_ Dimitri to explain
his ideas and his critics ALSO to explain his ideas.

My guess is that Dimitri's 'CANCELBOT' is intended to remove pure spam.

A little while ago, I received Spam from the same source an 8th time.
It even automatically replied to my... complaint AS IF it was not a
complaint but a request for info, and it also... forged my E-mail
address.

If Dimitri Vulis (and others) possess the technical genious to relieve
us of such very annoying spam-problems, I don't see at all how this
contradicts Free Speech, or the right of people to speak when invited
to open meetings.

In any case, I am extremely greatful for the info, and would appreciate
the full text and the sources of it.

Cheers
George