Nelson, David writes:
For example, consider two college roommates. One wishes to exercise his
freedom of expression by listing to music until 3 AM in the morning
(without the benefit of headphones, of course!). The other wishes to
exercise his right to get sufficient sleep so as to be well rested for
the big exam the following morning. Clearly, each roommate, taken
individually, is exercising a reasonable freedom, but in this case they
have come into conflict.
The student listening to music need only put on headphones, then they
will both be happy. It's a poor analogy.
While I have no opinion on the current case, it seems to me that the
basis for any such PR decision has to be based on the balance of rights.
Does the right of the allegedly abusive poster to express himself come
into conflict with the rights of the other mailing list participants to
conduct an orderly discourse? If such a conflict exists, then is the
imposition on the many sufficiently large to justify limiting the rights
of the one?
Unless the allegedly abusive poster is engaging in a technical denial
of service or other action unrelated to the actual substance of what
he is posting, there is never any reason to exclude him. Censorship
is disguised in many forms; many people like to practice it, but very
few are willing to call it what it is.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf