Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!dedibox.gegeweb.org!gegeweb.eu!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!nerim.net!novso.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.039 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.92; '*S*': 0.00; 'governments': 0.09; 'prohibits': 0.09; 'subject:language': 0.09; "wouldn't": 0.11; 'subject:python': 0.11; 'amendment': 0.16; 'discussion.': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'oct': 0.16; 'wei': 0.16; 'wed,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'restrictions': 0.17; 'thu,': 0.17; 'permission': 0.20; 'received:209.85.214.174': 0.21; "i've": 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.25; 'common': 0.26; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'subject:list': 0.28; 'maybe': 0.29; 'that.': 0.30; 'law.': 0.30; 'certain': 0.33; 'to:addr :python-list': 0.33; 'received:google.com': 0.34; 'list': 0.35; 'whatever': 0.35; 'apply.': 0.35; 'law,': 0.35; 'pm,': 0.35; 'received:209.85': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'but': 0.36; "wasn't": 0.36; 'anything': 0.36; 'possible': 0.37; 'does': 0.37; 'received:209': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'behind': 0.38; 'some': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:209.85.214': 0.39; 'subject:-': 0.40; 'header:Received:5': 0.40; 'stand': 0.61; 'first': 0.61; 'times': 0.63; 'more': 0.63; 'privacy': 0.65; 'congress': 0.65; 'forward': 0.66; 'email,': 0.66; 'civil': 0.66; 'constitution': 0.84; 'fucking': 0.84; 'law*': 0.84 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=3xQ+6/bZVpoSKcEbQVECVlddDPKg+dEIpWfBHp6p8oI=; b=ObNEXGiDCl4tJuN6aLz5ieZIWPf1dMie72kXbUNVqFJOgo6lP+I2q+2URdFx5ch88U hUxAsdyKSiCQk8LpU63kxSafx06rUv1YJHy5lyQhx7LhYQ/8DLc5yyxN2syTttsSR1S/ a7fWh52x+eYuorfTFavHVgGJLyJneT6GR5xCLzJe3TwvMfJ7J2b49ivEI2wk0S8Taftj QQawD+zFfNNeAftZGW1OIsgKmHrTNI1yCCVA4AkSYCxg6ZqeFSbH9uXv49Y+tpMfleRZ pDdgEDC91188d1Qr6SC5oLPmUV9Ze1/JmzFSb0VjmKOSs8wKDdn+m1BVeMb1l2rm0l9+ x6iw== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <85099bc2-fa24-4cc5-bd94-3015b9af694f@googlegroups.com> <507d900e$0$6599$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5a713407-d82f-4067-8ffa-6b8b66c1edf1@googlegroups.com> <507e1baf$0$6599$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <35b41895-45d9-4f2e-9285-2bb0c36fb2a6@googlegroups.com> <507f3c6c$0$6599$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <77361fb4-a59a-45b0-85e2-95472aec3716@n7g2000pbj.googlegroups.com> <8b0ebc42-52f2-442d-aa92-12eff32b9d0e@v9g2000pbi.googlegroups.com> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:23:34 +1100 Subject: Re: Aggressive language on python-list From: Chris Angelico To: python-list@python.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 26 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1350534217 news.xs4all.nl 6867 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:42586 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:31577 On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Dwight Hutto wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:50 PM, wu wei wrote: >> Did you really forward a private email to a public mailing list without >> permission? >> >> Are you really that fucking ignorant of the law? > > This is a public discussion. Maybe you just need to stand behind a > loophole in the law, but the first amendment overrides that. Common misconception. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the *making of any law* that restricts certain freedoms. It does not have ANYTHING to do with "I have first amendment rights to say whatever I like". It is restrictions on Congress and the state governments in the US of A. Even if python-list were purely US-based, it still wouldn't apply. Deliberately forwarding a private email without permission is a breach of courtesy, more than of the law. It may be possible to make a civil case of the breach of privacy in some jurisdictions, but mainly it's just a gross discourtesy. (Assuming, that is, that the email wasn't actually intended to be public. I've at times responded on-list to a private email, but with a tag at the top explaining that.) ChrisA