Re: Fighting the cybercensor

[Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>]

jim bell wrote:
> At 08:02 PM 2/1/97 -0800, Toto wrote:
> >  I also think that the other list members involved in this thread are
> >'nobodies', but I was too polite to say anything.
> 
> It's odd that you would say this.  I get that impression ("nobodies") about
> practically EVERY subject discussed here.  Why name this particular one, as
> if it were somehow special?

Jim,
 "You're 'nobody', till 'somebody' loves you..."
 Everybody has their own prediliction as to what interests them, 
and what is 'frivilous' on the list.
 Someone, in private email, mentioned that they felt that 60% of the
posts were 'uninteresting'. I replied that this seemed to be a close
approximation of many list members' beliefs, but that, if we all
moderated/censored out 'our' 60% of 'uninteresting' posts before 
the list was sent out, that there would be precious little left.

  I don't know if you recognized my comment as humor, since I have
an aversion to using 'happy faces' (the result of a childhood trauma),
but I just love to poke fun at the plethora of personas on the list
who seem to believe that anything outside of their immediate scope
of interest is somehow 'unworthy' of being posted the list.

 By the way, in order to prevent this post from going to the 'flames'
list, I will NOT say that you are a low-life, scum-sucking Nazi piece
of shit. I will likewise refrain from suggesting that your mother
wears army boots, you are a child-pornographer, an imbecile, and
a pervert, or that you beat your wife and children regularly.
 By golly, I think I'm 'getting the hang of' this new, improved,
Politically Correct, nicey-nice list format.

Toto