Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)

Hi,

Forwarded message:

> From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>
> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 10:00:46 -0500
> Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)

> I think that your analogy is slightly flawed.
> 
> While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do
> not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road.

Correct and using my model would in no way interfere with a users use of the
network. It would not add excessive delay or other impedemants. It would be
a one time event that occured when the site was initialy accessed. Much like
having to go past the picketers on the side of the road at least once.

> There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no
> right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can
> stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the
> packets will be watching. :)

If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public
money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more so
than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw man
argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants.


   _______________________________________________________________________
  |                                                                       |
  |            Speak the truth, but leave immediately after.              |
  |                                                                       |
  |                                     Slovenian Proverb                 |
  |                                                                       |
  |     Jim Choate                                 ravage@ssz.com         |
  |     The Armadillo Group                        www.ssz.com            |
  |     Austin, Texas, USA                         512-451-7087           |
  |_______________________________________________________________________|

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <199706050148.UAA04173@einstein.ssz.com>, on 06/04/97 
   at 08:48 PM, Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com> said:

>Hi,

>Forwarded message:

>> From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>
>> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 97 10:00:46 -0500
>> Subject: Re: Webpage picketing (fwd)

>> I think that your analogy is slightly flawed.
>> 
>> While the farmers have a right to protest on the side of the road they do
>> not have a right to interfere with the travelers on the road.

>Correct and using my model would in no way interfere with a users use of
>the network. It would not add excessive delay or other impedemants. It
>would be a one time event that occured when the site was initialy
>accessed. Much like having to go past the picketers on the side of the
>road at least once.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. If I am stoped even once that
is one time too many. In the real world if a group of picketers try to
impead my entrance to a store parking lot the growl of a 427 does alot to
convince them of the errors of their ways. :)

>> There is no real way you could picket on the "Info highway" as you have no
>> right to interfere with the packets traveling on the highway. You can
>> stand of to the side if you want but somehow I don't think that the
>> packets will be watching. :)

>If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public
>money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more
>so than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw
>man argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants.

Yes and it is the participants who are sending the packets. If I am
sending packets between point A & B you have no right to interfere with
those transmisions. You donot have the right to re-route them or substute
them for others. If you have somthing to say put up a web page and if I am
interested I'll stop by and take a look. You don't have the right to force
me to look. To do so would be a serious perversion of the 1st Amendment.


- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM5Ym5o9Co1n+aLhhAQEbfwP8Ch1BB7nrIak2Baep5plGpQxZL3tia4Eu
c09a5CERexO6UXsbjUcVpH7Yn+npeJLSGGVnzgsLD+rm3grpykffg7s+I0QBT7kO
0A6z9sQiDKlaqpdlSctairH2t+AOjR0p1/PQH22NPotvoWviHflVSH8nihegC2z4
tteGKpxHeDQ=
=3meN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Unfortunately, Jim has no idea what he's talking about. Accepting public
money does not magically turn something into a public forum. 

I'm not sure how I can get this idea through.

-Declan


On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Jim Choate wrote:
> 
> If it is a fully privately funded highway, I agree. If it accepts public
> money I obviously disagree with you. As to the packets watching, no more so
> than the cars being used are watching the picketers. This is a straw man
> argument. The issue here is not the packets but the paticipants.