Re: RE-Listing The Echo   
     By: TIM RICHARDSON to DAMON A. GETSMAN on Sun Mar 10 2013 15:16:00   
      
   	At this point in the discussion I just want to state that I find    
   it completely and utterly ridiculous that there is no way for me to verify    
   who the legitimate moderator of the echo truly is.  This is a ridiculous    
   situation for me to be in, not knowing whether or not I am truly able to    
   engage in discussion with somebody who is posting content that clearly has    
   no reason to be censored.  I'm replying to the message, but I'm not    
   addressing it directly to Tim.  Therefore I'm not breaking this ridiculous    
   rule, should it actually be legitimate, at this point.  When I have time I    
   will be researching this issue further to find out whether or not I even    
   have to do this ridiculous measure.   
      
    > DA>Re: RE-Listing The Echo   
    > DA>By: TIM RICHARDSON to ALL on Thu Feb 28 2013 07:54:00   
    >    
    > DA>This one always makes me wonder.  If you have two hotheaded people that   
    > DA>are in the echo at each others' throats, what if one requests a duel?   
    >    
    > In fact....there are those for whom the luckiest thing in the early history    
    > our nation was the out-lawing of dueling to settle matters of personal honor   
      
   	Indeed I have no doubt about that in the slightest.   
      
    > Take the likes of Klahn, for instance.   
    >    
    > Were the art of personal dueling to the death, with a beautiful set of old   
    > fashioned matching dueling pistols still legal...someone would have slapped   
    > him with their glove many years ago, and shot him dead at ten paces.   
    >    
    > That, by the way, is NOT a personal threat of physical violence...merely a   
    > statement of fact, that would be clearly understood as such, by anoyone who   
    > had a long enough acquaintance with Klahn here in Fido.   
      
   	Although I have attempted to remain purely neutral in this debate    
   as to the character of Klahn, I am finding this harder and harder with    
   every break that I find in which I am able to engage in discourse on    
   FidoNet.  I am trying pretty hard (against my nature, I might add) to not    
   make any waves here.  I'm a new guy, so I hardly have the right, as far as    
   I'm concerned at this point, regardless of how discussion may have evolved    
   to this point.   
   	Unfortunately I'm starting to see a larger and larger amount of    
   the content that he posts as being rather ridiculous.  I don't believe    
   that someone like yourself, oh he whom I must allegedly not be replying to    
   at this point, should be sitting and attempting to antagonize him purely    
   for the hell of it.  That is not to say that I wouldn't be doing the exact    
   same thing in your shoes, though.  Knowing my personality, were your    
   allegations to be true, I would no doubt be rubbing a little sand into the    
   same vagina myself at any possible opportunity.   
      
    > DA>Would that be a threat of physical violence?   
    >    
    > Not at all. Although, since personal dueling to the death was outlawed short   
    > after Aaron Burr shot Alexander Hamilton to death, would no doubt be quite   
    > illegal, by my new rules for this echo...offering to give an asshole who   
    > doesn't know how to talk to people like a gentleman (like Klahn, for instanc   
    > the opportunity to back up their snide little insults or outright lies about   
    > the character of another poster, with the courage of facing someone on a fie   
    > of honor, would not be considered by me as an actual `physical threat'. Only   
    > an offer to a `jerk' the opportunity of backing their words with honorable   
    > combat.   
      
   	I agree with this completely.  I think that the idea of duels    
   should certainly have been allowed to continue.  There are far too many    
   occasions where the character flaws of a person have been so unchallenged    
   and allowed to flourish that they have outweighed any of the positive    
   traits that may have, at one point, remained.  These people only spread    
   their blight amongs the other people in society when allowed to go on    
   unchecked.  Nature has relied on such methods of darwinian challenge since    
   the very beginning of time; who are we to argue with such a time tested    
   methodology, in all of our wisdom in the brief window of our species'    
   emergence upon the scene?   
      
    > If such offer was made...and accepted by the person challenged...rectifying   
    > the end result with the legal system would, of course, be the responsibility   
    > of the winner of the encounter.   
    >    
    > But nothing in such a situation that got started in this echo would be a   
    > violation of my echo rules.   
      
   	I like what you are preaching, my good man.  It's a shame at this    
   point that there is no higher authority to verify which of you may be the    
   legitimate moderator of this echo.  I'm starting to almost feel that if    
   you ARE holding a coup d'etat that it is one that I would support, with    
   the behavior that I've seen from the jackbooted Klahn, but I have not yet    
   had the time to research the only documents that might give support or    
   lack thereof to the issue at hand, namely the FidoNet policy documents.     
   Once I have a couple of days off from my wage slaving once again I will    
   surely research this and weigh back in on the matter.   
      
    > DA>Surely it would be more of a   
    > DA>gentleman's request to debate in the most final arena possible.   
    >    
    > Exactly my point. Someone who offers insult to another should be prepared to   
    > defend their position, even with deadly force if no apology from the offende   
    > is forthcoming, and thats what the injured party challenges the offender wit   
    > A simple challenge offered in a gentlemanly manner, is hardly a `threat of   
    > physical violence'...merely an offer to the offender to back his insults or   
    > false accusations in a duel.   
    >    
    > Of course...we both know such is illegal, and the `winner' of such an act   
    > would spend a lot of years in prison afterward.   
      
   	And this is surely one of the issues with society today that    
   allows such unspeakable acts of atrocity to continue such as we see being    
   carried out by this 'great country' of ours.   
      
    > DA>Also, on a completely unrelated tangent, I'm afraid that I must respond t   
    > DA>this widespread pigeonholing of Klahn with   
    > DA>KLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!    
    > Klahn is in a `pigeonhole' of his own making. He decries any responses or   
    > posts he `percieves' as insulting....although he has freely engaged in such   
    > posts aimed at others. His stock-in-trade is the snide little put-downs that   
    > have become his way of dealing with anyone who holds a different view from h   
    > own. The best argument Klahn has had for his political or current events   
    > positions up till now in this echo, has been the `moderator's hammer'.   
      
   	I hope that you did not miss the Star Trek Wrath of Khan reference    
   that I was making there.  :)   
   	I'm seeing this.  The macros are quickly becoming ridiculous    
   enough to make me want to vomit, as well.   
      
    > He banned or `vacationed' any and all opposition, and in regard to various   
    > controversies involving those who brought such on themselves, has put many   
    > things `off-topic'. Although he himself felt free to engage in things he   
    > forbid others to.   
      
   	Would anybody else care to weigh in on this a bit, as well?  I'd    
   really like to be able to hear from some more people in here to go along    
   with researching of the dry and boring policy documents that I'm going to    
   have to turn up at my next available opportunity.  I want to know the    
   brass tacks of this matter, por dios.   
      
    > That will change completely when I've settled the true `ownership' of this   
    > echo, and intend to utilize a very hands-off approach to the moderatorship   
    > here. Sometimes the best way to `moderate' an echo is for the moderator to   
    > stay out of the way, and let discussion and exchanges follow their natural   
    > course. Most all echoes that were run that way were successful.   
      
   	I agree completely.  Jackbootedness is a surefire way to quash the    
   most controversial (and usually therefore the most productive and    
   enlightening) discussions in many arenas.  Surely there must be a set of    
   rules to be followed, but they must allow discussion to take its natural    
   course as much as possible at all times.   
      
    > Under the old rules of this echo...what I've just posted on the matter of   
    > personal dueling AND union violence and Klahn's approval thereof, could have   
    > netted someon a two week suspension, if not an outright ban from the echo.   
      
   	If this is the truth, it is ridiculous and I will support any    
   attempted coup d'etat.  This is not because I am here to make waves or    
   anything of the sort, it is simply because I know that in such a case I    
   will also be banned, almost certainly sooner rather than later, and I find    
   that very foolish.   
      
    > Under my new, simple and realistic, rules of echo behavior however, simply   
    > stating what's on one's mind, without resort to threatening violence or bodi   
    > harm, is perfectly proper.   
      
   	I agree.   
      
    > A political debate arena...which this echo is intended to be, should be an   
    > area where people aren't afraid of speaking their mind, and all are reminded   
    > that such debate can sometimes get heated. So everyone should be keeping the   
    > head down, their wits about them, and be prepared to take a little friendly   
    > fire now and again.   
      
   	Again, I am in concurrance.   
      
    > Holding a tight rein on users such that all have to be mindful of `staying o   
    > the good side' of the moderator (make that read `never dis-agreeing with him   
    > is detrimental to a freely-flowing exchange of thoughts, opinions, and yes,   
    > even occasional disagreements on the issues of the day. Such a method of   
    > running an echo discourages a more relaxed method of political exchange amon   
    > people such as we.   
      
   	Yeah, this is starting to sound a lot like the propaganda network    
   that is run in the US.   
      
    > From now on, posting of articles and\or opinion pieces and columns in their   
    > entirety, is fully allowed, and discussion of poster's agreement or   
    > disagreement on their subject matter is strongly encouraged.   
      
   	I see no reason for such a ban, either.  There is certainly not    
   enough traffic here so that such a ban could be warranted due to spamming    
   or otherwise making the echo unusable, and it's a great way to seed    
   discussion and to show references for those who are too last to JFGI.   
      
    > My goal is to revive this echo, and make it a place where people can feel fr   
    > to actually `talk' to one another, without feeling restricted by some idiot   
    > holding the `moderator hammer' over their head all the time. A more relaxed   
    > and permissive atmosphere is just the thing this place needs to breathe some   
    > life into it, don't you think?   
      
   	I'm starting to think so; again, I have more research to take care    
   of before I weigh in on this conclusively on one side or the other,    
   though.   
   	I certainly am interested in hearing other people's viewpoints on    
   the matter, too.   
      
      
   -The opinions expressed are not necessarily an advocation of any of the   
   aforementioned ideologies, concepts, or actions.  We still have the freedom of   
   speech, for now, and I enjoy using it in a satirical or ficticious manner to   
   amuse myself.-   
      
   “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary   
   act.”--  George Orwell   
   --- SBBSecho 2.14-OpenBSD   
    * Origin: telnet://bismaninfo.hopto.org:8023/ (1:282/1057)