| At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
Internet and US National Security?
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 5 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Elementary, my dear Fnord. Apparently you suffer from the "free speech means I can enter your bedroom at 3 am and start doing my electric guitar rendition of 'stairway to heaven'" theory of expression. In essence, you are accusing any publication that exercises editorial selection of censorship. That's an absurd theory of what free speech means; indeed, it is the negation of free expression, because it prevents people and groups from promoting their own views and thus erects huge obstacles to any attempt to voice diverse ideas.
Bruce has free expression and had already posted his article on his own website, where it is fully accessible. That's the main reason I didn't think it was a good idea to publish it here. Besides that, ICANNWatch has no obligation to post everything anyone posts here. For a publication, free speech means the right to select content. We have every right to refrain from using our own publications and facilities to promote ideas that we think are uninteresting, wrong, silly, and dangerous.
Note that ICW consists of diverse editors. I think it was unfortunate that it was posted, but apparently Michael didn't, so that's how it goes.
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
Re:Something's screwy here
by Mueller
|
|
|
 |
I am, and have always been, a non-editor of ICANNWatch, I am not affiliated with ICW in any way. Since your change of software I haven't been able to find a stats page for the number of submissions, but I know that prior to that I had submitted more articles than anyone else, and I suspect that that hasn't changed. Only one of my hundreds (GAK!) of submissions has ever been rejected and that was at my own request. SFAICT none of my thousands of followup comments has ever been modded down. Nor do I disagree with your thoughts in this current article, or your response to my comment, other than this claim to editorial omnipotence. Of course, as O. W. Holmes Jr. and others have famously said: freedom of speech is not absolute. And as the late Yippee! Abbie Hoffman said in response to a question in a theatre at my alma mater UBC regarding whether freedom of speech includes the right to scream 'Fire' in a crowded theatre, Abbie screamed 'Fire'. Surprisingly, there was no stampede for the exits. It is all in the context, it is all about what one is willing to put up with to further one's goals. Therefore it is chilling to believe that, should I write something you consider uninteresting, wrong, silly, [...or...] dangerous it will be rejected. If my lack of rejection is just due to my buying into your dissing ICANN groupthink, then I guess I'll go elsewhere. I assure other ICANNWatchers that my apparent ability to do the ICW secret handshake is entirely coincidental. I intended to be a watchdog and Milton wants me to be a lapdog. Woof! Sure you're an editor and therefore an owner of this site and sure you can control what you wish to appear here, but if you think that robust dissent is best served by ignoring it, then, well, you're no better than ICANN. -g
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |

Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|