[Imc-aotearoa-ed] Re: dk excells himself again

[finn c.]

Hi,

> Just so we know what we are talking about, Finn says it is
> not technically possible to prevent him from posting (unless
> there is a way to get Active's database to fail any upload
> with 'dk' in the name or text fields and make him think the
> site is broken?). So a ban means anytime one of us sees a DK
> post or comment we instantly hide it regardless of content.

... to clarify that yet again, we *can* prevent people from posting to
the site, but it would be a stretch to call this a 'banned by technical
means'.

> So we (AIM editors) are still going to have to deal with the
> abuse, but readers won't. Neither will they be able to read
> anything worthwhile he might have posted. Are we not just
> making extra work for ourselves hiding inoffensive stuff? Is
> this not censorship?

ffs. Ok, lets examine the free speech argument - have you considered the
rights of the other users of indymedia? Don't you think that people have
the right to say what they think without being harassed? Don't you think
that the rights of the combined body of indymedia users out weigh dk's?

> I know I'm going to get clobbered for saying this but I
> can't actually see how it solves the problem. Maybe we get
> to feel good about getting him back for being abusive? I
> don't know. Anyway I'm not blocking consensus so yeah send
> him the letter, pending discussion on IMC-Aotearoa of course. 

Thankyou for not stalling this for a third month.

finn


-- 
now you guys with this animal activists rights have overstepped the line.