response 56 of 184:

Feb 1 04:18 UTC 2004

I think it's unfortunate that you'd dismiss valid points out of hand, simply
because you're able to produce "street cred". 

Admittedly, my knowledge of Grex history is mostly anecdotal, but I'm still
reasonably sure that a tenet of Grex has been to allow everyone an equal
opportunity to direct the system's future. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but
I thought that was the larger reason Grex came to fruition.

At what point does a person earn the right to say that something's wrong, or
that change is needed? And at what point does a person gain the right to trump
the suggestions of others?

Personally, I have little (if any) stake in Grex. I've been a user on and off
for probably a decade now, give or take a few months. Does that longevity earn
me a place at the table of elders? (Don't worry, that's a rhetorical question)

Either way, as something of an outsider looking in, there seems to be varying
degrees of hypocrisy on both sides. One side is all but chanting "Do as I say,
not as I do." while some of the others who are championing free speech as an
absolute are themselves guilty of raising a stink to have their works deleted.

I don't think either side is inherently right here. If the items are restored,
there's almost certainly going to be some emotional duress to a few users.
If they're wiped from the digital ether forever, the concept of speech without
censorship is damaged. 

It really boils down to what you care more about. You're voting for a friend,
or you're voting for your principles.