|
Grex > Coop13 > #108: Jim, Jack, and I have a Question | |
|
| Author |
Message |
jp2
|
|
Jim, Jack, and I have a Question
| 
Feb 5 19:31 UTC 2004 |
This item has been erased.
|
| 46 responses total. |
albaugh
|
|
response 1 of 46:
|
Feb 5 19:37 UTC 2004 |
Please give these lame hypotheticals a rest.
|
jp2
|
|
response 2 of 46:
|
Feb 5 19:46 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 3 of 46:
|
Feb 5 20:46 UTC 2004 |
Ask me on Tuesday.
|
jp2
|
|
response 4 of 46:
|
Feb 5 21:09 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 5 of 46:
|
Feb 5 22:06 UTC 2004 |
While I do think jp is stretching with the analogy between intoxication
and mental incompetence, I hope that does not divert people from
considering what I have said elsewhere about a hypothetical item about
recovery from addiction. Such an item would have tremendous potential in
terms of providing valuable insights for other addicts (or to friends and
family of addicts). I suggest that we should not permit censorship that
would remove such items simply because the original posting addict has
second thoughts about allowing the items to remain. The proper solution is
to allow the original addict to remove his/her own words and leave the
rest to provide whatever assistance other addicts, friends of addicts,
family of addicts, etc. might be able to glean for their own benefit. That
is all I am asking people to do with jep's items.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 6 of 46:
|
Feb 5 22:14 UTC 2004 |
The proper solution is to wait to see how the vote comes out, to find
out what it tells us about current thinking.
|
md
|
|
response 7 of 46:
|
Feb 5 23:16 UTC 2004 |
My answer is: if Jamie entered a bunch of items and responses he later
wanted removed because they were embarrassing to his older saner self,
I would definitely vote not to remove the items. In fact, just in case
a majority might eventually vote to remove them, I would copy them and
save them so I could quote my favorite passages in appropriate places.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 8 of 46:
|
Feb 5 23:32 UTC 2004 |
If you are saying the proper solution is whatever the grex voters decide,
then I beg to differ. If they vote in favor of reinstatement, then yes,
they will have found the proper solution because it balances jep's rights
to control his own words with the rights of others to control theirs. It
will also balance jep's rights to deny access to certain information with
the rights of others to provide and/or access helpful information.
The unfortunate fact that jep cannot deny access to 100% of the
information about him is merely a byproduct of his previous decision to
post publicly. He was warned and he continued. Therefore, any incidental
burden (a burden which jep has not really even demonstrated to date)
fairly falls on him and should not be borne by innocent posters and others
who may benefit from whatever words may remain.
If grex votes in favor of jep's request, that will not be a proper
solution. Instead it will simply prove grex does not believe in free and
uncensored speech. It will prove grex does not really care about providing
information to others in need, even after JEP HIMSELF said he wished such
information were available to him. It will prove grex has no compassion
for strangers or newbies, but only for favored insiders. As such, it will
not be a proper solution; it will merely prove grex has no core
principles that cannot be trumped by the desire to do personal favors for
favored persons.
|
md
|
|
response 9 of 46:
|
Feb 5 23:39 UTC 2004 |
And that makes Grex different from you how?
|