[Ti] Free Speech (OT) Long (was "Powerbook MacIntel... ")

[Mikael Byström]

If we're going to really continue this metatalk business onlist, I
suggest we allow some actual discussion, where people make an effort to
listen to one another when not expressing themselves freely, of what the
current members of this list view as acceptable to post to the list, have
some kind vote and try and get the list description fit what we agree on
(if that is possible). 

Mind you, I'd prefer if we could just keep it limited to "Apple's
Titanium Computers", but perhaps that's just my view.
I will not post much more about this, so the ball is yours. Personal
Attacks offlist please.

Further comments:
Henry Kalir said:
>The US is a free country, you have a right to free speech and so does 
>everyone else on this list. Don't like the style? Great - add a filter, 
>delete, ignore, criticize, just PLEASE  - no "litigation" garbage..

You choose to misunderstand the concept of "Free Speech". What Free
Speech mean is that you can choose the forum for expression and choose
what you express, but you can't choose what responses you get. Free
Speech certainly doesn't mean you can express your views on anything
anywhere without getting responses from your surrounding neighbours .

Within the world of discussions on mailing lists and other netbased
forums, you have the right to "Free Speech" within the domain of the
subject of the forum in question. Anything else is off topic including
metatalk. That doesn't mean this can't be accepted and often it is
accepted by most (members at least). We seem to accept much not related
to the discussion of "Apple's Titanium computers" here, including Mac OS
X (9) related topics. Metatalk too can be useful sometimes, when it
actually concerns most members. But should it be allowed, by the members
or the list admin, to go on until no-one is left that wants to talk about
the subject of the forum? No-one can be forced to shut up, but the list
admin can ban people if they don't listen to what the admin say. Is list
admin activity a violation of free speech? Is a member expressing his/her
view on the appropriateness of a certain post or types of content in
posts a violation of free speech? Perhaps it is, but I don't view it like
that.

IMHO to repost metatalk material that was posted to oneself clearly
labeled as "offlist", as Shawn did, should only be based in the firm
belief that a majority of list members benefit from the information. In
the case of my expressed views to Shawn offlist, on letting a then
resolved somewhat negative discussion fade out (see end of msg), was
taken by him as me trying to dictate what he should not do. It was meant
to be a suggestion and as expressing my view on the matter to him
personally, because to me it only concerned him, but for whatever reason
he refused to see it that way. 

I think Shawn is *right* that I can't demand from him that he behaves
according to widespread and accepted netiquette, but I do have every
right to expect that he or anyone else does and in addition I have every
right to express my belief that he should, also to his mailbox (until he
lets me know he wouldn't want that anymore). He or anyone else has every
right to not listen of course.

I also think Shawn is *wrong* when he says that his impression that he
had somehow been violated, by my freely expressed opinion to him, give
him an undeniable right to do with it what he wants. He could have just
expressed himself right back to me. 

E X T R A  E X T R A  V I O L A T A T I O N  O F  F R E E  S P E E C H:

Here's my alleged "attack", sent in private, on Shawns right to freely
express himself anywhere:
> This have been and gone and further comments at this point are quite
unnecessary.

Wow! I can really see how Shawns rights to free speech were diminished by
my outrageous comment that truly undermined his (perceived) authority.