"Capt. Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
nk.net...

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.



A moderator can't censor by law. Otherwise, he or she could be 1. sued.
2 imprisoned, or 3 both.

Really? Try posting anything but the party line at rec.guns or rec.hunting.
In the latter group, I once spotted a message from a guy who said that he
liked to pack his whole family into the car and drive 4 hours to a place
where they'd shoot prairie dogs. I'm not an animal rights activist, but I
was curious about his pastime, so I asked why they shot prairie dogs. My
message never made it. I emailed the moderator. He said it was off topic.

In rec.guns, I once described an incident where an acquaintance of mine was
denied a pistol permit. His neighbors had noticed that he was being a
peeping tom, spying on a woman, the back of whose house faced his yard. He
was using a device made for long-distance viewing. Unfortunately, the device
was a scope mounted on a .223 Remington rifle. Believe it or not, the cops
could not do anything but stop by and yell at him. A few months later, the
dummy wanted a pistol permit. Here, you need to have 3 references sign your
application. He asked the same neighbors who'd called the cops on him
earlier. They called the cops AND the judge who rubber stamps the permit,
and explained that the guy was totally irresponsible with guns. He didn't
get the permit. I used this as an example of someone who's too damned stupid
to be around other people with a weapon.

The message never made it. Nobody busts moderators. Their newsgroups
constitute their own private dick-turf.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of

The NG is a public forum, but is theoretically a group of people who have
agreed to discuss a common theme. Obviously, as per rec.boats and most other
groups, this is a "purist" vision that doesn't play out in the real world.

I think the freedom-of-speech, off-topic relationship is like a guy printing a
political poster. He's allowed to print and distribute the posters, but he
might be prohibioted from pasting his message on the front door of City Hall.

If a person joins a group that was established with a moderator, there should
be no expectation of ability to post whatever comes to mind.

Gould 0738 wrote:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of

The NG is a public forum, but is theoretically a group of people who have
agreed to discuss a common theme. Obviously, as per rec.boats and most other
groups, this is a "purist" vision that doesn't play out in the real world.

Not only that but internet access is not really "public". You have to
access it through a private ISP, and you are subject to their TOS rules.
Free speech in not an absolute here.


I think the freedom-of-speech, off-topic relationship is like a guy printing a
political poster. He's allowed to print and distribute the posters, but he
might be prohibioted from pasting his message on the front door of City Hall.

Also like the difference between a public golf course and a private
country club. If you join the private club, you agree to abide by the
rules of the club, some of which may limit your freedoms to some extent.
You can either agree to it, or forfeit your membership. The benefit, of
course, is a higher standard of quality, than what can be expected in an
"anything goes" public course.

If you join a moderated newsgroup, you agree to the terms. If you break
the rules, you will lose your access. The biggest problem with moderated
newsgroups is filling the shoes of moderator. Trying to remain
objective, and not taking sides based on personality, is very tough to
do. A moderator's job is a thankless one. You'll never please everyone.
Someone will always hate you........

Dave


If a person joins a group that was established with a moderator, there should
be no expectation of ability to post whatever comes to mind.

Dave,

It seems to me that it's not OT in general that people are complaining
about. It's the political OT! I'm personally sick of it. None of
these political postings are meant to inform, but rather inflame others.
They're more borne out of hatred and bitterness. Also, folks posting
this crap seem to think it's going to sway folks to their points of
view.

Just my humble OT opinion.

-JimL

From: (Florida Keyz)

Why can't the list moderator delete them? Just curious

From: "Capt. Frank Hopkins"

A moderator can't censor by law. Otherwise, he or she could be 1. sued.
2 imprisoned, or 3 both.

You both really need to get a clue.

Capt. Bill

"LaBomba182" wrote in message
...
From: (Florida Keyz)

Why can't the list moderator delete them? Just curious

From: "Capt. Frank Hopkins"

A moderator can't censor by law. Otherwise, he or she could be 1. sued.
2 imprisoned, or 3 both.

You both really need to get a clue.

Capt. Bill


I think the moderator can come to your house and whack your pee-pee with a
metal ruler. I think I read that somewhere.