Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #544496 > unrolled thread

Newsgroup censorship

Started byPeter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk>
First post2016-01-11 10:41 -0800
Last post2016-01-13 10:16 -0800
Articles 20 on this page of 108 — 19 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 10:41 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 12:55 -0600
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 11:16 -0800
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 13:43 -0600
          Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:04 -0500
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-11 16:29 -0600
        Re: Newsgroup censorship "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 15:54 -0800
          Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 02:48 -0800
            Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 06:06 -0800
              Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 07:12 -0800
                Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:16 -0500
                Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 23:27 -0800
                Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 10:20 -0800
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 10:25 -0800
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 10:30 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 05:58 -0800
        Re: Newsgroup censorship moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-12 16:14 +0000
          Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:36 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-11 19:27 +0000
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 15:21 -0600
      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:22 -0500
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:41 -0600
          Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 17:11 -0800
            Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:55 -0600
    Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 13:42 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-11 22:22 +0000
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-11 16:34 -0600
          Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 14:57 -0800
            Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 20:45 -0500
              Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 20:34 -0600
                Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:01 -0500
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 07:59 -0600
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:26 -0500
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:11 -0600
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:58 -0500
                          Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:07 -0600
                            Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 00:22 -0500
                              Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 08:01 -0600
        Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 14:51 -0800
          Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 00:32 +0000
            Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:00 -0800
              Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 02:16 +0000
                Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:12 -0800
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:34 -0800
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 06:19 +0000
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 23:10 -0800
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 18:35 +0000
                          Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 11:05 -0800
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 03:39 +0000
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 23:06 -0800
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 23:28 -0800
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-12 14:33 -0600
                Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:17 -0500
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-12 03:41 +0000
          Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 17:07 -0800
            Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:47 -0600
              Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 21:53 -0500
                Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 07:57 -0600
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:21 -0500
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:05 -0600
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 12:12 -0800
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:32 -0600
                          Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:04 -0500
                            Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:09 -0600
                              Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 00:24 -0500
                                Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 08:03 -0600
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:55 -0500
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 17:04 -0600
                          Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 00:21 -0500
              Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 20:16 -0800
                Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 09:33 -0600
              Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 21:02 -0800
                Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 09:37 -0600
                  Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-12 16:04 -0800
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 16:17 -0800
                    Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:43 -0600
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:48 -0800
                      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 17:51 -0500
                        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 14:19 -0600
            Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:13 -0800
              Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 20:37 -0600
                Re: Newsgroup censorship pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-11 19:27 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:33 -0500
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 15:54 -0600
      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 17:35 -0500
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-12 13:40 +1100
      Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:08 -0500
      Re: Newsgroup censorship R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-01-12 03:13 +0000
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 20:56 -0800
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-12 22:21 +1100
        Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 09:34 -0600
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-01-11 22:00 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-12 13:40 +0000
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Catherine Jefferson <spamtrap@spambouncer.org> - 2016-01-12 08:42 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 11:04 -0600
      Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 09:13 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 11:26 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:09 -0600
        Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 12:27 -0800
          Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 14:38 -0600
            Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 12:54 -0800
          Re: Newsgroup censorship benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:00 -0500
    Re: Newsgroup censorship Rock Brentwood <federation2005@netzero.com> - 2016-01-12 17:28 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 20:23 -0800
        Re: Newsgroup censorship "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 07:54 -0800
    Re: Newsgroup censorship James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 09:58 -0800
      Re: Newsgroup censorship Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 12:13 -0600
        Re: Newsgroup censorship HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 10:16 -0800

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →


#544573

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 17:22 -0500
Message-ID<5XVky.151960$zT1.68395@fx26.iad>
In reply to#544544
On 01/11/2016 04:21 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 1/11/2016 12:41 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
>> Newsgroup censorship
>>
>> All persons in the democracies of the West have the fundamental right
>> to have access
>> to all expressions of knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity,
>> and to express
>> their thoughts publicly.
>
> No, Peter, you do not.
>
> In the capitalist democracies of the West:
> - People may be required to pay for access to some expressions of
> knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity.
> - Many expressions of knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity
> are explicitly controlled editorially, which means that submissions by
> contributors can be accepted, rejected, or modified at the negotiation
> between contributor and editor. This applies to the
> letters-to-the-editor section of the newspaper, to book publishers, to
> magazine publishers, to news organizations, to television channels, to
> moderated online message boards.
> - You may not have air time to express your views in restaurants,
> libraries, city streets, concert halls, shops, movie theaters, or police
> stations, unless you've been given prior permission to do so.
>
> You do have the right to express yourself, though not necessarily to the
> audience you desire and not necessarily for free. You always have the
> option of creating a web page or a blog site for no cost to you, but you
> will have to create your own audience for it. You do not have the right
> to have access to any channel's audience you desire.

Peter you have no rights. You must seek permission of your liege for 
anything you do. That is the Western Way. It's our history and it is our 
reality today. So long as people like Boinker are there to enforce it, 
that is what you can expect from life.



-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544601

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 17:41 -0600
Message-ID<n71ein$u4q$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544573
On 1/11/2016 4:22 PM, benj wrote:
> Peter you have no rights. You must seek permission of your liege for
> anything you do. That is the Western Way. It's our history and it is our
> reality today. So long as people like Boinker are there to enforce it,
> that is what you can expect from life.

Of course he has rights. Just not the rights he hoped he had.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544627

FromPeter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2016-01-11 17:11 -0800
Message-ID<dcacaf7f-9933-41ca-b114-27ec448178b0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544601
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:41:17 AM UTC+8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 1/11/2016 4:22 PM, benj wrote:
> > Peter you have no rights. You must seek permission of your liege for
> > anything you do. That is the Western Way. It's our history and it is our
> > reality today. So long as people like Boinker are there to enforce it,
> > that is what you can expect from life.
> 
> Of course he has rights. Just not the rights he hoped he had.
> 
According to Bod, I have no right to be heard in 'public forums' but a duty to accept bullshit from above.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544637

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 19:55 -0600
Message-ID<n71mdq$194b$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544627
On 1/11/2016 7:11 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:41:17 AM UTC+8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 1/11/2016 4:22 PM, benj wrote:
>>> Peter you have no rights. You must seek permission of your liege for
>>> anything you do. That is the Western Way. It's our history and it is our
>>> reality today. So long as people like Boinker are there to enforce it,
>>> that is what you can expect from life.
>>
>> Of course he has rights. Just not the rights he hoped he had.
>>
> According to Bod, I have no right to be heard in 'public forums' but a duty to accept bullshit from above.
>

You have rights to be heard in unmoderated forums, not in moderated 
forums. Both are public, and your choice to complain about moderated 
forums is on you.

You don't have a duty to accept anything. You do not have a duty to 
believe that 2+2=4 if you don't want to. Now, there is a question about 
whether it is wise or unwise to believe it. But wisdom has nothing to do 
with duty or whether you feel like it's been forced down your throat. 
Refusing to believe something that other people believe is always your 
choice, even though doing that may be unwise.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544553

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 13:42 -0800
Message-ID<d18bba38-3cee-486c-b5c9-d8bc242a2a05@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544496
In an unmoderated newsgroup, censorship is applied by abuse, being called a crank or coordinated silence. 

Peter, IMO, newsgroups in general are a waste of time when it comes to scientific advances and discoveries.  And academia is worse.  The way forward is to make your case directly to the public in video.  Just a suggestion.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544577

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-11 22:22 +0000
Message-ID<dimdmc-alf.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#544553
James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> In an unmoderated newsgroup, censorship is applied by abuse, being called a crank or coordinated silence. 
> 
> Peter, IMO, newsgroups in general are a waste of time when it comes to scientific advances and discoveries.  And academia is worse.  The way forward is to make your case directly to the public in video.  Just a suggestion.

The general public couldn't give a rat's ass aobut some scientific theory.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544580

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-11 16:34 -0600
Message-ID<n71alv$nve$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544577
On 1/11/2016 4:22 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In an unmoderated newsgroup, censorship is applied by abuse, being
>> called a crank or coordinated silence.
>>
>> Peter, IMO, newsgroups in general are a waste of time when it comes
>> to scientific advances and discoveries.  And academia is worse.
>> The way forward is to make your case directly to the public in
>> video.  Just a suggestion.
>
> The general public couldn't give a rat's ass aobut some scientific
> theory.
>
>

scientific theories by cranks are not worth a rat's ass.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544586

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 14:57 -0800
Message-ID<0ea41eb6-2664-48d4-80de-bc7a20bf66aa@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544580
On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 2:34:45 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 1/11/2016 4:22 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> > James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> In an unmoderated newsgroup, censorship is applied by abuse, being
> >> called a crank or coordinated silence.
> >>
> >> Peter, IMO, newsgroups in general are a waste of time when it comes
> >> to scientific advances and discoveries.  And academia is worse.
> >> The way forward is to make your case directly to the public in
> >> video.  Just a suggestion.
> >
> > The general public couldn't give a rat's ass aobut some scientific
> > theory.
> >
> >
> 
> scientific theories by cranks are not worth a rat's ass.

Well then its a good thing that the scientific method provides a means to distinguishing between novel advancement and misguided thinking. That provides you a roadmap that will allow you/us to proceed without feeling threatened by thoughts that are discomforting to you/us.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544632

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 20:45 -0500
Message-ID<TUYky.99109$cu5.39906@fx13.iad>
In reply to#544586
On 01/11/2016 05:57 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 2:34:45 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>> On 1/11/2016 4:22 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> In an unmoderated newsgroup, censorship is applied by abuse, being
>>>> called a crank or coordinated silence.
>>>>
>>>> Peter, IMO, newsgroups in general are a waste of time when it comes
>>>> to scientific advances and discoveries.  And academia is worse.
>>>> The way forward is to make your case directly to the public in
>>>> video.  Just a suggestion.
>>>
>>> The general public couldn't give a rat's ass aobut some scientific
>>> theory.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> scientific theories by cranks are not worth a rat's ass.
>
> Well then its a good thing that the scientific method provides a means to distinguishing between novel advancement and misguided thinking. That provides you a roadmap that will allow you/us to proceed without feeling threatened by thoughts that are discomforting to you/us.
>
It does not matter if a new idea is correct or not. Wnat matters is if 
the idea implied threatens your political agenda. That's censorship is 
so necessary. Imagine the problems if climate deniers were allowed free 
uncensored access to public media and scientific journals. The energy 
tax wouldn't have a chance!

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544645

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 20:34 -0600
Message-ID<n71ooi$1bc6$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544632
On 1/11/2016 7:45 PM, benj wrote:
> It does not matter if a new idea is correct or not. Wnat matters is if
> the idea implied threatens your political agenda. That's censorship is
> so necessary. Imagine the problems if climate deniers were allowed free
> uncensored access to public media and scientific journals. The energy
> tax wouldn't have a chance!

Since when does lack of censorship imply that you should get it for 
FREE? This is a capitalist society, I'm sure you know. Making you pay 
for access is not censorship.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544652

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 22:01 -0500
Message-ID<80_ky.145232$xz4.52142@fx12.iad>
In reply to#544645
On 01/11/2016 09:34 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 1/11/2016 7:45 PM, benj wrote:
>> It does not matter if a new idea is correct or not. Wnat matters is if
>> the idea implied threatens your political agenda. That's censorship is
>> so necessary. Imagine the problems if climate deniers were allowed free
>> uncensored access to public media and scientific journals. The energy
>> tax wouldn't have a chance!
>
> Since when does lack of censorship imply that you should get it for
> FREE? This is a capitalist society, I'm sure you know. Making you pay
> for access is not censorship.

Clearly as usual you have no understanding of anything if life. The 
purpose of copyright laws is NOT to insure that authors and their 
descendants get rich. The purpose is to ENCOURAGE authors to create 
works for the betterment of human civilization. This is what "fair use" 
is all about. Research and edcational use are supposed to be free. But 
the pure greed of authors (and even their estates after they die... Why 
should copyrights extend beyond the death of the author?) has managed to 
change that, extending copyrights for interminable lengths and stopping 
fair use at every turn. It's a pitiful display of human nature at it's 
worst.

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544749

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 07:59 -0600
Message-ID<n730st$19me$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544652
On 1/11/2016 9:01 PM, benj wrote:
> On 01/11/2016 09:34 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 1/11/2016 7:45 PM, benj wrote:
>>> It does not matter if a new idea is correct or not. Wnat matters is if
>>> the idea implied threatens your political agenda. That's censorship is
>>> so necessary. Imagine the problems if climate deniers were allowed free
>>> uncensored access to public media and scientific journals. The energy
>>> tax wouldn't have a chance!
>>
>> Since when does lack of censorship imply that you should get it for
>> FREE? This is a capitalist society, I'm sure you know. Making you pay
>> for access is not censorship.
>
> Clearly as usual you have no understanding of anything if life. The
> purpose of copyright laws is NOT to insure that authors and their
> descendants get rich. The purpose is to ENCOURAGE authors to create
> works for the betterment of human civilization. This is what "fair use"
> is all about. Research and edcational use are supposed to be free.

No sir. Not in the western world. I have no idea where you ever got the 
idea that research and education are supposed to be free. They never 
have been.

Wanting reality to be something other than it is, is not the same as 
saying something is wrong.

> But
> the pure greed of authors (and even their estates after they die... Why
> should copyrights extend beyond the death of the author?) has managed to
> change that, extending copyrights for interminable lengths and stopping
> fair use at every turn. It's a pitiful display of human nature at it's
> worst.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544840

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 14:26 -0500
Message-ID<Xrcly.158411$TE6.11506@fx41.iad>
In reply to#544749
On 01/12/2016 08:59 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 1/11/2016 9:01 PM, benj wrote:
>> On 01/11/2016 09:34 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> On 1/11/2016 7:45 PM, benj wrote:
>>>> It does not matter if a new idea is correct or not. Wnat matters is if
>>>> the idea implied threatens your political agenda. That's censorship is
>>>> so necessary. Imagine the problems if climate deniers were allowed free
>>>> uncensored access to public media and scientific journals. The energy
>>>> tax wouldn't have a chance!
>>>
>>> Since when does lack of censorship imply that you should get it for
>>> FREE? This is a capitalist society, I'm sure you know. Making you pay
>>> for access is not censorship.
>>
>> Clearly as usual you have no understanding of anything if life. The
>> purpose of copyright laws is NOT to insure that authors and their
>> descendants get rich. The purpose is to ENCOURAGE authors to create
>> works for the betterment of human civilization. This is what "fair use"
>> is all about. Research and edcational use are supposed to be free.
>
> No sir. Not in the western world. I have no idea where you ever got the
> idea that research and education are supposed to be free. They never
> have been.
>
> Wanting reality to be something other than it is, is not the same as
> saying something is wrong.

Might makes right. Got it, Boinker.

>> But
>> the pure greed of authors (and even their estates after they die... Why
>> should copyrights extend beyond the death of the author?) has managed to
>> change that, extending copyrights for interminable lengths and stopping
>> fair use at every turn. It's a pitiful display of human nature at it's
>> worst.
>>
>
>


-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544847

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 14:11 -0600
Message-ID<n73ml7$jt8$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544840
On 1/12/2016 1:26 PM, benj wrote:
> On 01/12/2016 08:59 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 1/11/2016 9:01 PM, benj wrote:
>>> On 01/11/2016 09:34 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> On 1/11/2016 7:45 PM, benj wrote:
>>>>> It does not matter if a new idea is correct or not. Wnat matters is if
>>>>> the idea implied threatens your political agenda. That's censorship is
>>>>> so necessary. Imagine the problems if climate deniers were allowed
>>>>> free
>>>>> uncensored access to public media and scientific journals. The energy
>>>>> tax wouldn't have a chance!
>>>>
>>>> Since when does lack of censorship imply that you should get it for
>>>> FREE? This is a capitalist society, I'm sure you know. Making you pay
>>>> for access is not censorship.
>>>
>>> Clearly as usual you have no understanding of anything if life. The
>>> purpose of copyright laws is NOT to insure that authors and their
>>> descendants get rich. The purpose is to ENCOURAGE authors to create
>>> works for the betterment of human civilization. This is what "fair use"
>>> is all about. Research and edcational use are supposed to be free.
>>
>> No sir. Not in the western world. I have no idea where you ever got the
>> idea that research and education are supposed to be free. They never
>> have been.
>>
>> Wanting reality to be something other than it is, is not the same as
>> saying something is wrong.
>
> Might makes right. Got it, Boinker.

I didn't say that, Ben. Get a grip.

What I said is that your claim that research and education are supposed 
to be free in the western world is just a whacko brainfart.

What zero cost has to do with oppression and dominance is beyond me. 
Maybe you can try to splutter something about that that makes sense.

>
>>> But
>>> the pure greed of authors (and even their estates after they die... Why
>>> should copyrights extend beyond the death of the author?) has managed to
>>> change that, extending copyrights for interminable lengths and stopping
>>> fair use at every turn. It's a pitiful display of human nature at it's
>>> worst.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544913

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 17:58 -0500
Message-ID<Ryfly.87918$Hz3.33627@fx43.iad>
In reply to#544847
On 01/12/2016 03:11 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 1/12/2016 1:26 PM, benj wrote:
>> On 01/12/2016 08:59 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> On 1/11/2016 9:01 PM, benj wrote:
>>>> On 01/11/2016 09:34 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>> On 1/11/2016 7:45 PM, benj wrote:
>>>>>> It does not matter if a new idea is correct or not. Wnat matters
>>>>>> is if
>>>>>> the idea implied threatens your political agenda. That's
>>>>>> censorship is
>>>>>> so necessary. Imagine the problems if climate deniers were allowed
>>>>>> free
>>>>>> uncensored access to public media and scientific journals. The energy
>>>>>> tax wouldn't have a chance!
>>>>>
>>>>> Since when does lack of censorship imply that you should get it for
>>>>> FREE? This is a capitalist society, I'm sure you know. Making you pay
>>>>> for access is not censorship.
>>>>
>>>> Clearly as usual you have no understanding of anything if life. The
>>>> purpose of copyright laws is NOT to insure that authors and their
>>>> descendants get rich. The purpose is to ENCOURAGE authors to create
>>>> works for the betterment of human civilization. This is what "fair use"
>>>> is all about. Research and edcational use are supposed to be free.
>>>
>>> No sir. Not in the western world. I have no idea where you ever got the
>>> idea that research and education are supposed to be free. They never
>>> have been.
>>>
>>> Wanting reality to be something other than it is, is not the same as
>>> saying something is wrong.
>>
>> Might makes right. Got it, Boinker.
>
> I didn't say that, Ben. Get a grip.
>
> What I said is that your claim that research and education are supposed
> to be free in the western world is just a whacko brainfart.
>
> What zero cost has to do with oppression and dominance is beyond me.
> Maybe you can try to splutter something about that that makes sense.
>
>>
>>>> But
>>>> the pure greed of authors (and even their estates after they die... Why
>>>> should copyrights extend beyond the death of the author?) has
>>>> managed to
>>>> change that, extending copyrights for interminable lengths and stopping
>>>> fair use at every turn. It's a pitiful display of human nature at it's
>>>> worst.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Boinker you say all these things but have no clue as to what the meaning 
of the words you use would be. Your total argument always points exactly 
as I say and yet you try to wiggle out of it by pointing to individual 
words saying "I didn't say that! See?". Why no point to the individual 
letters and say "See, these letters don't individually mean that!". You 
are a hoot, Boinker! All Libs are!

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544921

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-12 17:07 -0600
Message-ID<n74109$147k$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544913
On 1/12/2016 4:58 PM, benj wrote:
> Boinker you say all these things but have no clue as to what the meaning
> of the words you use would be. Your total argument always points exactly
> as I say and yet you try to wiggle out of it by pointing to individual
> words saying "I didn't say that! See?". Why no point to the individual
> letters and say "See, these letters don't individually mean that!". You
> are a hoot, Boinker! All Libs are!

Uh huh.
And so here is what I said:
"No sir. Not in the western world. I have no idea where you ever got the
idea that research and education are supposed to be free. They never
have been."
And to you this means
"Might makes right."

OK, so let's add to the list of foibles you suffer from the fact that 
you cannot read sentences in English and comprehend them, and that your 
mind substitutes the meanings you feel should be there.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544997

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-13 00:22 -0500
Message-ID<sally.153917$zT1.52423@fx26.iad>
In reply to#544921
On 01/12/2016 06:07 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 1/12/2016 4:58 PM, benj wrote:
>> Boinker you say all these things but have no clue as to what the meaning
>> of the words you use would be. Your total argument always points exactly
>> as I say and yet you try to wiggle out of it by pointing to individual
>> words saying "I didn't say that! See?". Why no point to the individual
>> letters and say "See, these letters don't individually mean that!". You
>> are a hoot, Boinker! All Libs are!
>
> Uh huh.
> And so here is what I said:
> "No sir. Not in the western world. I have no idea where you ever got the
> idea that research and education are supposed to be free. They never
> have been."
> And to you this means
> "Might makes right."
>
> OK, so let's add to the list of foibles you suffer from the fact that
> you cannot read sentences in English and comprehend them, and that your
> mind substitutes the meanings you feel should be there.

Obama says education should be free. I just saw him say it! You KNOW you 
are are a "progressive" Boinker. So come clean.



-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#545056

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-13 08:01 -0600
Message-ID<n75lbf$oor$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544997
On 1/12/2016 11:22 PM, benj wrote:
> On 01/12/2016 06:07 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 1/12/2016 4:58 PM, benj wrote:
>>> Boinker you say all these things but have no clue as to what the meaning
>>> of the words you use would be. Your total argument always points exactly
>>> as I say and yet you try to wiggle out of it by pointing to individual
>>> words saying "I didn't say that! See?". Why no point to the individual
>>> letters and say "See, these letters don't individually mean that!". You
>>> are a hoot, Boinker! All Libs are!
>>
>> Uh huh.
>> And so here is what I said:
>> "No sir. Not in the western world. I have no idea where you ever got the
>> idea that research and education are supposed to be free. They never
>> have been."
>> And to you this means
>> "Might makes right."
>>
>> OK, so let's add to the list of foibles you suffer from the fact that
>> you cannot read sentences in English and comprehend them, and that your
>> mind substitutes the meanings you feel should be there.
>
> Obama says education should be free. I just saw him say it! You KNOW you
> are are a "progressive" Boinker. So come clean.

Obama said it. I didn't. You said that I did say it.

You, Ben, are a filthy liar, and you have no remorse about it.

For some reason, you feel justified and entitled to bullshit endlessly, 
and when you are called out for it, you dance and shuck and jive.

I don't know what your purpose here is, but I do know why you live alone.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544585

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-11 14:51 -0800
Message-ID<27aa5cd0-8685-4a09-aceb-980e44089e6e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544577
On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 2:31:04 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In an unmoderated newsgroup, censorship is applied by abuse, being called a crank or coordinated silence. 
> > 
> > Peter, IMO, newsgroups in general are a waste of time when it comes to scientific advances and discoveries.  And academia is worse.  The way forward is to make your case directly to the public in video.  Just a suggestion.
> 
> The general public couldn't give a rat's ass aobut some scientific theory.
> Jim Pennino

If you yourself were confident in your scientific beliefs maybe you wouldn't feel so threatened by people whose beliefs don't conform perfectly yours. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#544617

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-12 00:32 +0000
Message-ID<r6udmc-abg.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#544585
James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, January 11, 2016 at 2:31:04 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > In an unmoderated newsgroup, censorship is applied by abuse, being called a crank or coordinated silence. 
>> > 
>> > Peter, IMO, newsgroups in general are a waste of time when it comes to scientific advances and discoveries.  And academia is worse.  The way forward is to make your case directly to the public in video.  Just a suggestion.
>> 
>> The general public couldn't give a rat's ass aobut some scientific theory.
>> Jim Pennino
> 
> If you yourself were confident in your scientific beliefs maybe you wouldn't feel so threatened by people whose beliefs don't conform perfectly yours. 

I don't feel threatened by whinning cranks; I find them laughable.

None of which however has anything to do with the fact that the general
public couldn't give a rat's ass aobut some scientific theory.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web