reorganizing homeschooling newsgroups

jayne.kulikauskas · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 17

I'm thinking about proposing a reorganization of the homeschooling
newsgroups. You can see what I (and others) have already posted on
news.groups.proposals here:

http://groups.google.com/group/news.groups.proposals/browse_thread/thread/1c15874639affcfa#

There has also been discussion on the meh-sc.org web forum here:
http://www.meh-sc.org/forum/showthread.php?t=235

My latest thought is to propose a moderated announcement group - a
place for links to homeschooling-related web sites, discussion fora
and blogs. It could also include information about homeschooling
resources, both online and off, and homeschooling conferences. I'm
envsioning a low traffic moderated group that would not have
discussions on it. It would direct people interested in moderated
discussion to the meh-sc.org web forum or to
misc.education.home-school.misc if they prefer something unmoderated.

Steven Sauss's posts about resources would be very appropriate for the
group I
am envisioning and I would especially like his input on this idea.
Although
the group would be moderated, one would have the option of setting
follow-ups to mehsm (and cross-posting one's original posts there) so
that any ensuing discussion would be unmoderated.

I am also considering including a proposal to remove
misc.education.home-school.christian since the group is useless now.
The trickle of legitimate homeschooling discussion could easily be
accomodated in mehsm.

I seek thoughts and input on these ideas. Feel free to add any
suggestions of your own.

Jayne

Archived from group: misc>education>home-school>misc

Michael S. Morris · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 780

Saturday, the 13th of October, 2007

I said:
Freedom always means that someone will be
perceived by the many to be abusing it.
Jayne:
Sometimes people really do abuse freedom; it is not merely perception.
That is the case here.

Agreed so far.

Jayne:
Mark is certainly entitled to express anti-
homeschooling opinions.

Agreed. Had he merely argued contrary opinions
he would have been much more welcome than he
is.

Jayne:
He is not entitled to use the names of other
people (or names easily mistaken for those of others)
to express those opinions.

He is not morally entitled. He is almost certainly
legally entitled as long as he refrains from actually
using other people's names.

Jayne:
He is not entitled to make posts with subject lines that
claim to be information on how to homeschool which then
turn out to be anti-homeschooling diatribes.

He is not morally entitled, but he certainly is free to that.
That is the nature of an unmoderated newsgroup.

Jayne:
He is not entitled to post the same
cut and paste screeds over and over again.

Not morally, no. Legally and constitutionally
(I mean per an unmoderated newsgroup) he is so
entitled.

I said:
Moreover, I predict all that will happen,
I mean, besides the craven surrender that deleting
m.e.h-s.c would represent, is that Mark will simply
perceive m.e.h-s.m as the new place that m.e.h-s.c
has been folded into, and infect that group, with the
eventual result being the call for censorship of that
group, too, and various people kvetching about how
usenet has outlived its usefulness.
Jayne:
Freedom of speech does not mean that people can say anything
anywhere.

Actually, short of voice-activated triggers on guns aimed
at human beings, yes, it pretty much does mean that people
can say anything anywhere. It means that all kinds of people
can visit an unmoderated newsgroup, like m.e.h-s.c, and
can post all kinds of irrelevant and off-topic things,
and *no one* can stop them. That is, if social pressure not
to behave in that way does not stop them.

Jayne:
When m.e.h-s.c was created, it was given a charter which it
no longer fulfills.

I believe you. However, instead of simply ignoring the troll and
keeping the group active, you and others went away. So, what I
see as the reason this group no longer works is the, bad political
choice, to walk away from the group.

Jayne:
Sometimes people come to m.e.h-s.c looking for
information and support. Instead, they find deliberately confusing
and abusive posts.

And yet, if people had not walked away, what they would have found
is a more typical usenet newsgroup, with lots of trash posts,
but also plenty of information and support. And they could
have chosen to ignore the trash in favor of the information and
support. The point is, one needs a thick skin and certain amount
of pluck to post on usenet. This has always been the case. It is
free. So, I see no problem with the fact that newbies who couldn't
deal with Mark, or didn't have the pluck to ignore him get
scared away. Those people probably shouldn't be on usenet in
the first place. But the fact remains that anybody who wants
to, can ignore him.

Jayne:
It is better to remove the group than to allow it
to be used this way.

No, it is worse. What will happen is you will infect
the other group with the virus.

Jayne:
Pressing the self-destruct button is not a
"craven surrender".

I think it most certainly is. The ship is afloat, and
it is not even close to sinking. And there's been some
good stuff posted here, and at a time when the m.e.h-s.c
website was pretty dead. I certainly don't want to shift over
to m.e.h-s.m and find that's now where Mark has taken up
residence.

Jayne:
If anyone has surrendered to Mark, it is you. You
are the one who most cooperates with him in turning a once thriving
newsgroup into the pointless mess it is today.

As far as I see it, Jayne, 100 responding-to-Mark posts of
mine give him less satisfaction than your last three posts
to this group. And I believe---perhaps more ardently than you
can imagine---that the *only* good response to evil speech
is good speech. That is why even my cooperation with John Rice
to simply avoid responding to Mark directly for one year was
a moral mistake, although in the spirit of an experiment.

Jayne:
As to whether or not Mark would carry his anti-homeschooling campaign
into m.e.h-s.m, I suspect that it will largely depend on whether you
engage him there.

I have zero intention of ever refraining from responding to him as
a program or strategy again. I did so for a year, and was undercut
in that moral compromise by the group's decision to leave anyway
before the year was up. Mark did not go away during the time I refrained
from responding to him.

Jayne:
I predict that if you walk away from the battle that
Mark will leave m.e.h-s.m alone.

It's not even a tempting experiment.

Jayne:
It is not honourable to fight
someone that you so greatly outclass.

And I am increasingly irritated by uses of metaphors of
violence to describe speech. I do not "fight Mark" by
any stretch of the imagination. I disagree with him and
occasionally express that disagreement.

Jayne:
It is obvious to anyone who
gives even a cursory examination to the posts that you are saner,
smarter and more successful that he is.

Thank you, I guess.

Jayne:
Are you waiting for Mark to
admit that you are right?

No.

Jayne:
It will never happen.

I am well aware of that.

Jayne:
Everyone else already
knows.

But not everyone thinks that the outcome of
the expression of disagreement is or will be or
even should be the capitulation of one side of
an argument to the other side.

Jayne:
Go find a worthy foe.

Why is it that you think I have a foe in Mark?
As I said, I don't think he gets any satisfaction
out of me at all. I don't fit any of his stereotypes.

Mike Morris
(msmorris@netdirect.net)

jayne.kulikauskas · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 17

On Oct 13, 2:12 pm, "Michael S. Morris"
wrote:

> Freedom always means that someone will be
> perceived by the many to be abusing it.

Sometimes people really do abuse freedom; it is not merely perception.
That is the case here. Mark is certainly entitled to express anti-
homeschooling opinions. He is not entitled to use the names of other
people (or names easily mistaken for those of others) to express those
opinions. He is not entitled to make posts with subject lines that
claim to be information on how to homeschool which then turn out to be
anti-homeschooling diatribes. He is not entitled to post the same
cut and paste screeds over and over again.

> Moreover, I predict all that will happen,
> I mean, besides the craven surrender that deleting
> m.e.h-s.c would represent, is that Mark will simply
> perceive m.e.h-s.m as the new place that m.e.h-s.c
> has been folded into, and infect that group, with the
> eventual result being the call for censorship of that
> group, too, and various people kvetching about how
> usenet has outlived its usefulness.

Freedom of speech does not mean that people can say anything
anywhere. When m.e.h-s.c was created, it was given a charter which it
no longer fulfills. Sometimes people come to m.e.h-s.c looking for
information and support. Instead, they find deliberately confusing
and abusive posts. It is better to remove the group than to allow it
to be used this way. Pressing the self-destruct button is not a
"craven surrender". If anyone has surrendered to Mark, it is you. You
are the one who most cooperates with him in turning a once thriving
newsgroup into the pointless mess it is today.

As to whether or not Mark would carry his anti-homeschooling campaign
into m.e.h-s.m, I suspect that it will largely depend on whether you
engage him there. I predict that if you walk away from the battle that
Mark will leave m.e.h-s.m alone. It is not honourable to fight
someone that you so greatly outclass. It is obvious to anyone who
gives even a cursory examination to the posts that you are saner,
smarter and more successful that he is. Are you waiting for Mark to
admit that you are right? It will never happen. Everyone else already
knows. Go find a worthy foe.

Jayne

Scott Bryce · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 478

jayne.kulikauskas@gmail.com wrote:

> The word "Christian" in the group name seems to be somewhat of a
> trigger for Mark. It is quite possible that he would leave the other
> group alone

Perhaps the word "Christian" is a trigger for Mark, but he seems to
migrate over to other groups very easily. Remember the problems he
caused at alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer when someone crossposted there? I don't
think he will have any trouble migrating to mehsm.

jayne.kulikauskas · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 17

On Oct 13, 4:36 pm, "Michael S. Morris"
wrote:
> Saturday, the 13th of October, 2007

[...]
> Jayne:
> He is not entitled to post the same
> cut and paste screeds over and over again.

Michael:

> Not morally, no. Legally and constitutionally
> (I mean per an unmoderated newsgroup) he is so
> entitled.

And I am morally, legally and constitutionally entitled to ask that a
newsgroup that does not fulfill its charter be removed.

[...]
> Jayne:
> When m.e.h-s.c was created, it was given a charter which it
> no longer fulfills.
>
> I believe you. However, instead of simply ignoring the troll and
> keeping the group active, you and others went away. So, what I
> see as the reason this group no longer works is the, bad political
> choice, to walk away from the group.

The vast majority of the regular participants of this group found it
unbearable. So they left. Surely someone with such a broad concept
of freedom of speech as you have recognizes that there is also freedom
not to speak.

> Jayne:
> Sometimes people come to m.e.h-s.c looking for
> information and support. Instead, they find deliberately confusing
> and abusive posts.
>
> And yet, if people had not walked away, what they would have found
> is a more typical usenet newsgroup, with lots of trash posts,
> but also plenty of information and support. And they could
> have chosen to ignore the trash in favor of the information and
> support. The point is, one needs a thick skin and certain amount
> of pluck to post on usenet. This has always been the case. It is
> free. So, I see no problem with the fact that newbies who couldn't
> deal with Mark, or didn't have the pluck to ignore him get
> scared away. Those people probably shouldn't be on usenet in
> the first place. But the fact remains that anybody who wants
> to, can ignore him.
>
> Jayne:
> It is better to remove the group than to allow it
> to be used this way.
>
> No, it is worse. What will happen is you will infect
> the other group with the virus.

The worst case scenario is that it will become just like mehsc. You
just finished explaining to me that anybody who can't handle that
shouldn't be on Usenet in the first place. As far as I can tell,
there is no longer a community on the .misc group for Mark to
disrupt. There seems to be one consistent poster and he gives every
appearance of being thick-skinned enough to deal with Mark just fine.

> Jayne:
> Pressing the self-destruct button is not a
> "craven surrender".
>
> I think it most certainly is. The ship is afloat, and
> it is not even close to sinking. And there's been some
> good stuff posted here, and at a time when the m.e.h-s.c
> website was pretty dead.

Whatever good stuff has been posted to m.e.h-s.c could just as easily
be posted to m.e.h-s.m. I doubt there was anything distinctively
Christian about it.

> I certainly don't want to shift over
> to m.e.h-s.m and find that's now where Mark has taken up
> residence.

What difference does it make where you read his posts? You have
explained that you can ignore him whenever you wish.

[...]
> Jayne:
> As to whether or not Mark would carry his anti-homeschooling campaign
> into m.e.h-s.m, I suspect that it will largely depend on whether you
> engage him there.
>
> I have zero intention of ever refraining from responding to him as
> a program or strategy again. I did so for a year, and was undercut
> in that moral compromise by the group's decision to leave anyway
> before the year was up. Mark did not go away during the time I refrained
> from responding to him.

The word "Christian" in the group name seems to be somewhat of a
trigger for Mark. It is quite possible that he would leave the other
group alone but much less likely if you continue to feed him.

[...]
> Jayne:
> It is not honourable to fight
> someone that you so greatly outclass.
>
> And I am increasingly irritated by uses of metaphors of
> violence to describe speech. I do not "fight Mark" by
> any stretch of the imagination. I disagree with him and
> occasionally express that disagreement.

It seems to me that you introduced that metaphor by your use of the
phrase "craven surrender". Without that, I suspect that my first
choice of metaphor would have been the expression "pissing contest".

> Jayne:
> It is obvious to anyone who
> gives even a cursory examination to the posts that you are saner,
> smarter and more successful that he is.
>
> Thank you, I guess.

It was faint enough praise that we can't count it a compliment.
However, much as I disagree with your approach to Mark, I do in
general have a high opinion of you and hold you in respect.

[...]
> Jayne:
> Go find a worthy foe.
>
> Why is it that you think I have a foe in Mark?
> As I said, I don't think he gets any satisfaction
> out of me at all. I don't fit any of his stereotypes.

It seems likely that both of you are getting something from the other
to have continued your relationship, whatever you wish to call it, for
all this time. I suppose that you get a foil who makes you appear
superior and that what Mark gets is attention. I find the whole thing
a bit sad but mostly boring.

Jayne

Mark T · Joined: 15 Oct 2007 Posts: 1

wrote in message @q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> I'm thinking about proposing a reorganization of the homeschooling
> newsgroups. You can see what I (and others) have already posted on
> news.groups.proposals here:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/news.groups.proposals/browse_thread/thread/1c15874639affcfa#
>
> There has also been discussion on the meh-sc.org web forum here:
> http://www.meh-sc.org/forum/showthread.php?t=235
>
> My latest thought is to propose a moderated announcement group - a
> place for links to homeschooling-related web sites, discussion fora
> and blogs. It could also include information about homeschooling
> resources, both online and off, and homeschooling conferences. I'm
> envsioning a low traffic moderated group that would not have
> discussions on it. It would direct people interested in moderated
> discussion to the meh-sc.org web forum or to
> misc.education.home-school.misc if they prefer something unmoderated.
>
> Steven Sauss's posts about resources would be very appropriate for the
> group I
> am envisioning and I would especially like his input on this idea.
> Although
> the group would be moderated, one would have the option of setting
> follow-ups to mehsm (and cross-posting one's original posts there) so
> that any ensuing discussion would be unmoderated.
>
> I am also considering including a proposal to remove
> misc.education.home-school.christian since the group is useless now.
> The trickle of legitimate homeschooling discussion could easily be
> accomodated in mehsm.
>
> I seek thoughts and input on these ideas. Feel free to add any
> suggestions of your own.
>
> Jayne
>

Mark T · Joined: 15 Oct 2007 Posts: 6

wrote:

> Sometimes people really do abuse freedom; it is not merely perception.

Take a look at yourself and your cronies!

WHO followed Jude elsewhere to abuse him??? YOU!!!!

You don't want any intelligent discussion. You and your demented unqualified
cronies chased away any real duscussion of homeschooling by abusing and
vilifying professional educators such as myself. Google for the lists of
repeated INSULTS I put up with in
my first dozen posts.

How about beginning to work your way through "52 Homeschool Posts that can't
be answered by those at misc.education.home-school.christian" ??????

Or are you just more interested in GOSSIP and VILIFICATION of professional
educators????

Snapper · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 281

"Mark T" wrote
> A censored sanctuary away from the real world of education so that those
> with real educational qualifications can never poke holes in homeskoolun
> theories.

You've got to be kidding!

This newsgroup was always had a lot of anti-Christian and anti-homeschool
chatter as well as good educational debate. Than you arrived with your
mindless drivel, cut/paste gunk, insults, nastiness and rudeness. This
"noise" made it impossible for the actual debates to take place so the real
homeschoolers moved on.

And now you grumble that they don't want to talk!

One the other hand, I personally was disappointed to see that the majority
of the regulars moved on. Over the years that I've hung around in here
there have been many trolls visit, and I don't see Mark as any more skilled
than them. I understand the need for the web area to be able to discuss the
subjects that we don't need Marks drivel in, but to walk away from here and
now suggest closing the door permanently ....... ::sigh:: ...... he's not
that good at his chosen profession is he?

Snapper · Joined: 05 Aug 2007 Posts: 281

"Mark T" wrote
>Google for the lists of repeated INSULTS I put up with in my first dozen
>posts.

Love to Mark.

I didn't see anyone take a shot at you, so please post the link.

If you're embarrassed, just email it to me (unlike trolls I have a real
email address).

davidvaridel@optusnet.com.au

Mark T · Joined: 15 Oct 2007 Posts: 6

"Michael S. Morris" wrote:

> Jayne:
>> Mark is certainly entitled to express anti-homeschooling opinions.
>
> Agreed. Had he merely argued contrary opinions
> he would have been much more welcome than he
> is.

I did that but WASN'T welcomed here. Read my first 20 posts and "52
Homeschool Posts that can't be answered by those at
misc.education.home-school.christian"

I am not ANTI-homeschooling but against homeschooling done POORLY - such as
with Bob Jones "Uni" and Pensacolsa Christian Academy materials.

> Actually, short of voice-activated triggers on guns aimed
> at human beings, yes, it pretty much does mean that people
> can say anything anywhere. It means that all kinds of people
> can visit an unmoderated newsgroup, like m.e.h-s.c, and
> can post all kinds of irrelevant and off-topic things,
> and *no one* can stop them.

Exactly ... including parody of homeschooling stupidity and FEAR. Wink

Why are homeschoolers so FEARFUL of other opinions??????

> The point is, one needs a thick skin and certain amount
> of pluck to post on usenet. This has always been the case. It is
> free. So, I see no problem with the fact that newbies who couldn't
> deal with Mark, or didn't have the pluck to ignore him get
> scared away. Those people probably shouldn't be on usenet in
> the first place. But the fact remains that anybody who wants
> to, can ignore him.

Yep! People can also come along and LAUGH at the FEAR of homeschoolers
parodied in many posts.

> there's been some good stuff posted here, and at a time when the m.e.h-s.c
> website was pretty dead.

.... as predicted.

> the *only* good response to evil speech is good speech

.... and one (but not the only one) good response to evil speech is parody.
Wink

> Why is it that you think I have a foe in Mark?

I actually agree with little Mickey on some things.

> As I said, I don't think he gets any satisfaction out of me at all. I
> don't fit any of his stereotypes.

I am amused that you waste so much time. You're not worthy enough for me to
waste the same amount of time on you.

Mark T · Joined: 15 Oct 2007 Posts: 6

"Snapper" wrote:

> You've got to be kidding!

You're an idiot!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Prayer for David Verydull Varidel
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

O Lord, David Verydull Varidel's posts are so dull that I think I must be
dead. But if it be, Lord, by your grace and favour, that I am not in fact
dead - merely stunned into mind-numbing oblivion by the overall tedium and
general inconsequentiality of the proceeedings - grant your servant this:
grant that David Verydull Varidel becomes 'called up yonder' to that 'place
which you have prepared for him' right away ... if that be not too forward a
request, of course.

Amen.

P.S, Please heal his illiteracy and help him spell "Aussie" properly.

Mark T · Joined: 15 Oct 2007 Posts: 1

wrote:

> And I am morally, legally and constitutionally entitled to ask that a
> newsgroup that does not fulfill its charter be removed.

Plenty to discuss, Jayne.

How about beginning to work your way through "52 Homeschool Posts that can't
be answered by those at misc.education.home-school.christian" ?????? The
first three are reposted.

Or are you just more interested in GOSSIP and VILIFICATION of professional
educators????

> The vast majority of the regular participants of this group found it
> unbearable. So they left.

Any hint of real discussion on education hurt their widdle brains so they
ran away to their widdle protected sanctuary for pretend teechas.

> The worst case scenario is that it will become just like mehsc.

Oh! I though little Snotty Bryce's mehsc was so wonderful because you only
let rabid homeskoolas in there.

NO-ONE is banned or excluded from misc.education.home-school.christian

> It seems likely that both of you are getting something from the other
> to have continued your relationship, whatever you wish to call it, for
> all this time. I suppose that you get a foil who makes you appear
> superior and that what Mark gets is attention.

You're wrong Jayne. I get a laugh.

Does it upset you that people laugh at homeskoolun pretend teechas?

tj · Joined: 22 Aug 2007 Posts: 15

wrote in message @q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> I'm thinking about proposing a reorganization of the homeschooling
> newsgroups. You can see what I (and others) have already posted on
> news.groups.proposals here:
>

Oh, god... she's at it again....

> My latest thought is to propose a moderated announcement group - a
> place for links to homeschooling-related web sites, discussion fora
> and blogs. It could also include information about homeschooling
> resources, both online and off, and homeschooling conferences. I'm
> envsioning a low traffic moderated group that would not have
> discussions on it. It would direct people interested in moderated
> discussion to the meh-sc.org web forum or to
> misc.education.home-school.misc if they prefer something unmoderated.
>
> Steven Sauss's posts about resources would be very appropriate for the
> group I
> am envisioning and I would especially like his input on this idea.
> Although
> the group would be moderated, one would have the option of setting
> follow-ups to mehsm (and cross-posting one's original posts there) so
> that any ensuing discussion would be unmoderated.
>

Yes, you folks *really* need to move on and leave this place in peace to
heal.

> I am also considering including a proposal to remove
> misc.education.home-school.christian since the group is useless now.
> The trickle of legitimate homeschooling discussion could easily be
> accomodated in mehsm.
>

Then expect to find opposition. If you want to move on (and I
whole-heartedly agree with that decision), then do so. Get on with your
lives. Live long and prosper. JUST GO AWAY. The rest will take care of
itself. You and yours are not needed here.

> I seek thoughts and input on these ideas. Feel free to add any
> suggestions of your own.
>

My suggestion is the same as it has been all along. Make room for a new
generation of homeschoolers. JUST GO AWAY.

tj

Mark T · Joined: 15 Oct 2007 Posts: 1

wrote:

> His "parody" of a homeschooler's blog is under a name
> clearly meant as an allusion to you as are other features there.

Aw ... you read it. Wink

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MEHSC HOMEPAGE - The Original and Best! http://mehsc.blogspot.com/

Maintained by

Professor Michelle S. Morris
Fizzix Lecturer & Fonix Tutor
Butter Homeskool Uni
C/- Kitchen Table
Home
Bible Belt USA

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> We really don't know how Mark would respond to the removal of the
> group. He very well could interpret it as a victory and decide to
> rest on his laurels.

###############################################

THE REASON FOR http://www.meh-sc.org/:

In the past, the Usenet newsgroup misc.education.home-school.christian was a
dreadful place for anyone interested in education, Trew Kristyun homeskoolas
discussed sundry topics unrelated related to the educational practice of
home schooling and called professional educators "trolls".

As a result of the inability of these brain-dead Trew Kriustyun homeskoolas
to look at educational issues via reflective praxis and their refusal to
engage in educational debate, the meh-sc newsgroup became less and less
useful as a place for good information or discussion

These brain-dead Trew Kristyun homeskoolas desired an exclusive forum
without the challenge from professional educators who posed questions that
they could not answer.

########################################################

Brandon Staggs · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 18

"Michael S. Morris" wrote on Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:07:06 -0400:

> Because I objected to abandoning the group the first place,
> and didn't leave, and now, maybe I'm going to be *forced* to
> leave, apparently by people who have already left.

As far as I know, Jayne is the only person who is interested in
"shutting down" this group, if that is indeed her intent. She is an
individual and speaks only for herself.

As for "abandonment," some of us are still around. It's a sort of
vestigial thing I guess. This newsgroup had ceased serving its
purpose long before I set up a forum as an alternative. The only
thing the "moderation" has done is keep out blatant spam, and the only
poster from this ng who has been denied access is Mark. The volume of
posts from the "regulars" seems to me to be the same as it was here
before, which is to say, very light.

> By the way, Jayne, I know that Ted has refused even to join
> meh-sc.org, and I know in practice that Brandon is a pretty
> liberal moderator, but I wonder aloud how welcome Ted would
> be there. My sense is that there were several who left the
> newsgroup who felt that Ted was one who also should be
> excluded. That seems to me to say right there what is
> wrong with moderation.

Ted's fear (or disintrest) of the forum doesn't argue against
moderation at all. It says something of Ted.

As for my moderation, it consists entirely of removing blatant spam
posts, and to date, the only non-bot poster that has been banned is
Mark, because of his insipid vitriol.

> Jayne:
> I propose that the two groups return to their earlier
> state by consolidating.
>
> A) I don't get why that would even concern you in the
> slightest.

Neither do I.

> I think that if the departure of John Rice, Kanga, yourself,
> Brandon, Scott, MaG, streetrat were not victory enough for
> him, then I don't see why he wouldn't just go try and hound

Who cares what Mark regards as victory? Our "departure" was just a
desire to move to a forum that is more conducive to the purpose of
which we were here in the first place. You feed on the contention
that Mark and Ted and whoever introduces to the newsgroup -- and I did
at first, too -- but for many of us it became tiresome and not worth
the trouble.

I don't see how this could be regarded as some kind of battle for free
speech. Even if Jayne succeeds in her (to me, incomprehensible) goal
to consolidate groups into moderated ones, it will not materially
affect anyone.

> Freedom is motivating me. Open demonstration
> that evil speech is utterly and totally and
> completely without power to do evil. That even the
> worst speech cannot hurt us.

It seems odd to me to get worked up over this newsgroup so. Free
speech is not going to be hidered or advanced based on what happens to
a newsgroup virtually no one reads and even fewer post in.

Still, I see no reason to expend energy as Jayne is.

> Depends on how you consider "cowardice". I
> was not thinking of anything military with
> "craven surrender", but more just that many
> were willing to trade liberty for a kind
> of psychological peace. I think that's a
> craven, unmanly, uncourageous, unvirtuous trade.

That's silly, Michael. I didn't trade any liberty. Neither did
anyone else. They can all still post here if they want. That they
choose to post somewhere else is not "trading liberty" for peace. I
set up an alternative (which you initially supported, if my memory
serves) that would be a place for people to post without the side
noise from anti-hs idiots and spammers. Nothing more. I didn't
censor anyone -- I'm sure you understand that free speech does not
mean free access to private resources to magnify that speech. The
people posting (few they are) at the meh-sc.org forum are private free
individuals who have decided to discuss in a different venue free of
the nonsense spewed by one troll. There may be drawbacks to it, such
as less activity, but it's not a question of liberty given up.

> It still seems pointlessly vindictive of you even to attempt it.

Agreed. I just don't get it.

--
Brandon Staggs
http://www.swordsearcher.com
http://www.studylamp.com
http://www.brandonstaggs.com