On Thu, 2002-05-09 at 11:13, Sam Sgro wrote:
> Simply put: any filtering that would be done on this list, whether it be
> of viruses, offensive users, spam, etc. would be censorship of some form,
> however noble in motivation. The FreeS/WAN project has a political
> core: that information not be censored based on content.
I agree with your reasoning, and ask: what about censorship based on
*form*.
Why would a "no executable attachments" policy be considered censorship?
Why would a 100kb size limit be considered censorship?
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ ICQ#15735746 http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin_at_impsec.org pgpk -a jhardin_at_impsec.org
768: 0x41EA94F5 - A3 0C 5B C2 EF 0D 2C E5 E9 BF C8 33 A7 A9 CE 76
1024: 0xB8732E79 - 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"To disable the Internet to save EMI and Disney is the moral
equivalent of burning down the library of Alexandria to ensure the
livelihood of monastic scribes."
-- John Ippolito of the Guggenheim
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
909 days until the Presidential Election
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users_at_lists.freeswan.org http://lists.freeswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Mon Jul 29 2002 - 05:19:58 CEST