From: (author)
Subject: Lighten up, people, was : *PROVE* IT!
Date: 07 Oct 1997 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <01bccf9a$8b4ca320$49060a26@delilah> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <01bcd07d$2a779260$c17f0a26@delilah> <[email protected]> <01bcd0de$8f7296e0$6a7f0a26@delilah>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca, alt.censorship, alt.stupidity

.. ( Original Copy of tgis post in DejaNews )

Two new groups are welcomed to this thread. Come to alt.religion.wicca, and find out why.

I suspect that it's not quite as simple as all of that.

"Insensitivity" and "Harassment" are not synonomous, and no, there is no law against deliberately hurting someone else's feelings.

RBB has made this look like an attempt to trump up a charge in order to get even with, well, them, for making unpopular posts, and I still haven't seen anything that anyone has posted that would make it seem otherwise, as I've been looking.

"Next thing you know, people will be saying that I'm trying to kill the president to impress Jodie Foster", and "I'll be trying to kill the president to impress Jodie Foster" are NOT the same thing, but to hear some around here talk, you'd think that it was. When this fallacy is witnessed, it is usually accompanied by the ever popular politically correct trick of going ballistic as one throws out a wild misinterpretation of something that someone else said, in order to browbeat the listener into joining the lynch mob - or at least so it would seem, in the explanations of the situation available. That particular brand of behavior, fashionable or not, is one that can't be tolerated, ESPECIALLY in a Democratic setting, because of the standard of Justice that increasingly becomes the norm, as this sort of action becomes commonplace.

If RBB has been leaving out key details that the rest of you haven't seen fit to mention, then, by all means, write up a stock post, saved as a file, explaining the situation, and post it as a followup to Rob's protestations of innocence. If not, then the fact, which I will not disagree with, that RBB has been a troll, provides absolutely no excuse for this sort of abuse of the system. One point that is not subject to debate is that a prediction that something bad will occur may be a pathetic absurdity, but it is no threat.

I asked some of you to just killfile him, and forget him - is this your reasonable alternative? To try to get someone arrested on a false charge because he made you angry? You've already done something far worse to yourselves than anything that he could have done, if this is so. You've thrown your principles out the window in order to deal with a petty annoyance. Yes, I know what he said to Elfrey on line and I wouldn't accept, much less offer, an excuse for that. But that's no excuse for attempting to trigger wrongful prosecution.

I am now crossposting this to alt.censorship, and inviting those there, to come into this group, and take a look. The behavior here, merits examination. Alt.stupidity gets the usual invite, in cases like this, to come in and gaze in astonishment.

Moonchylde <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> .. You're correct, there is no "dislike" standard.
> .. But there are tests that say "would this intentional
> .. act invoke emotional distress in a reasonable person"?
>
> .. -Moonchylde
>
>
> .. Raven BlackBane <[email protected]> wrote
> .. in article <[email protected]>...
>
> ........ > .. Moonchylde wrote:
> ........ >
> ........ >
> ........ > ........ > .. Raven BlackBane wrote:
> ........ > ........ >
> ........ > ........ > .. ........ > .. The test for legality is not if you
> ........ > ........ > .. ........ > .. like or dislike something.
> ........ > ........ >
> ........ > ........ > .. What "test for legality?" There are
> ........ > ........ > .. THOUSANDS of legal "tests." Most of
> ........ > ........ > .. them have to do with the
> ........ > ........ > .. "reasonable person" standard.
> ........ > ........ >
> ........ > ........ > .. -Moonchylde
> ........ >
> ........ > .. There is no test that uses the "I dislike that"
> ........ > .. yard stick.

(text graphic from earlier post deleted)



( return to previous page )