[lit-ideas] Re: Censorship
- From: Eternitytime1@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 00:24:30 EDT
In a message dated 10/14/2005 9:25:16 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
(Phil, Robert and Marlena) voted for removal instead of forgiving
trespasses.
Dear Andy,
I beg your pardon?
Here is what I said:
"Instead of censorship, I would have preferred that our board of moderators
suggest to him that he begin to share his point of view AND be willing to
enter into discussion with other posts"
Now, fine, I have been informed that Andreas is our Board of Moderators --
that's fine, and it is good to know. (he's the sort that is fine to be a
whole Board all by himself, I suppose...<g>)
and, he *did* say that he posted to MA Camp prior to letting us know of his
intent. I am presuming that MA Camp is still receiving posts (unless he
unsubscribed, in which case I suppose we might be so informed? Or, he is
feeling
horrible that he didn't know how to write beyond just posting or well, it's
hard to say...even though I do like to imagine scenarios and can come up with
some really interesting [to me <g>] psychoanalysis of how and why a person
would do what he had done...
So, Andreas, being the Board, did interact with him.
Andy, if you will go back and reread what I said, I did say that there were
valid posts from MA and that it was okay with me to have them shared on this
list (as though we had a vote...but it is a delusion in many aspects of my
life and one which I am loath to confront...even here)
So, I'm not sure where you are 'getting' that I thought it was okay to
'censor' as in have him not send us stuff. My form of censoring, if one really
wants to call it that, was really for him to open up his brain and talk...and
not be like the people who forward me all sorts of things (many of them
right-wing but some on the left, too) and the only reason I let them is because
I
know that inside of themselves they have 'high need' to do so. (much like the
statistic of the people who are producing blogs are doing so because it is a
form of therapy <g>. THAT was a fascinating study...)
If MA needs to do so because of therapeutic reasons, I am sure we would all
understand and say -- "fine, go ahead and send forth without comment." But,
he needs to let us know that! (either with so many words or at least by
letting us know him in more than an 'oops, I'm sorry-problems with g-mail'...)
Not that I mind being called too faith-y. <g> It's like the ones who tell
me I'm too conservative and the ones who tell me I'm too liberal. I'm also
more faith-y than a lot of the faith-y types I know...and yet, not faith-y
enough, at the same time.
Believing in everything and nothing and thinking Andy does *not* get even
close to an 'A' in reading MY post,
Marlena in Missouri
(okay, maybe Missouri is kind of far away and Andy needs new glasses...or
the audio version of my post...)
Other related posts:
