[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
No Subject
- To: [email protected]
- From: Anonymous <[email protected]>
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 16:00:03 -0500
- Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above.It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.Please report problems or inappropriate use to theremailer administrator at <[email protected]>.
- Sender: [email protected]
>> (Many people here probably remember Fred Cherry - Panix pulled his
>plug for
>> "homophobia".)
>> chris.com pulled the plug on TRRJC3 (Igor's pal) because of content.
>I wish you could be a little more specific.
>Harrashing email and excessive cross-posting in violation of each
>UseNet
>group charter is not
>censorship.
If ISP's censored flames (harrasments, whatever) then we might as well call every ISP AOL.
>If someone sends a gay an email saying "I will kill you. Look out for
>the
>next gay pride parade" that's is legitimate ground for action.
What if it was a joke, or a false threat?
>> I also wouldn't trust Lance Cottrell. He's selling privacy for the
>$$, not
>> for the ideology; he'll bend over the moment he thinks there's more
>$$ in
>> bending over, which is usually the case.
>What is wrong selling privacy for money?
It usually involves making it shitty.
>> Remember how Sameer Parekh's C2Net used to try to peddle a "privacy
>ISP"
>> because he failed miserable and diversified into peddiling shitty
>software
>> and making idiotic legal threats? He happily pulled plugs bases on
>content,
>> while at the same time stating in court papers that he doesn't
>censor content.
>> What a pathological liar.
>I suppose you can back up your claim with documentation.
>What court document are you referring as evidence that Sameer Parekh
>is a
>pathological liar?
None is necessary. Parekh is a liar, and just a general tool of c2.net.