Hi all, I agree with Fred in many ways (surprise :-))) But, there are some aspects that need further discussion. As much as we revere our founding fathers, we ought to also look at how *they* felt about dissenters. They used tar and feathers and the stocks !! The early founders of this nation wrote the Alien and Sedition acts. I happen to think that open discussion is a very good thing... and I have gotten kicked in the britches on TNGEN-L from time to time for doing so... I'm not complaining (too much :-)) because we did agree to keep politics here on TNCHAT. As moderator of -ALL (where the Rootsweb 4 did most of their posting), I obviously believed in open communications and freedom of speech. I received many, many requests to "ban" people from -ALL and never did consider doing so. The closest I came was to consider having a vote on -ALL as to whether a certain person should be "banned." I dropped that idea because I really didn't want anyone "banned." So, part of the problem was me... I wouldn't do what most listowners would do... kick people off for bad behavior. And, I don't mean freedom of speech, I mean really vile stuff... vicious name calling, personal attacks, etc. In fact, when Brian suspended one -ALL member around November, I went begging him to let her back because I wanted to deal with the problem and try to resolve it. (She is the leader of the Rootsweb 4 by the way) This left Brian in a pickle when people started spreading mistruths about Rootsweb... and saying things so hurtful and mean-spirited that Rootsweb volunteers started unvolunteering. One thing I try to remember is that Brian has the right and even the duty to protect Rootsweb staff. So one question is this... do we think that a listowner should ever kick someone off a list? And if so, for what reasons? Is freedom of speech really unlimited? And, let's try an analogy about the Rootsweb action. Suppose we, here on TNCHAT, for example, started bashing the good folks at USIT? Spreading mistruths or bad-mouthing their management? Isn't it likely that 1) the Bridgett would "ban" them from this list (Bridgett, you might want to comment on this) or 2) USIT might take some action... and, ultimately "ban" the person or persons from using their server. How about another analogy (BTW I'm terrible at analogies).... suppose I invited a local genealogy society (which I didn't belong to) to meet at my house every Friday and I served them tea and cookies, kept the house warm, greeted them cheerfully at the door. And then let's suppose that one of the members decided that my tea was lousy, my cookies were stale, and didn't like my smile. This member loudly and repeatedly criticized me... and, perhaps she was right!!! Well, right or wrong I just might suggest that she was no longer welcome in my house. Whew! Sorry for that last one :-))) George of Lincoln Co. p.s. Mary and Pam got "banned" from TNGEN-L last summer... sometimes people need to have a "time out." On 1 Feb 99 at 12:59, TNCHAT-L@rootsweb.com wrote: > Political! > > The Delete Button is your option. > > Mary and Pam, > > You have done it now. However, I rather expected it - if for no other > reason than you need to devote your efforts to ALHN. > > Still the reasons for your leaving the TNGenWeb Project are obviously > deeply involved in Dr B's actions regarding the banishment of the > "four." It is also sad to note that the banishment occurred during a > USGenWeb Project election period. > > Because the action involved an open, not required, mailing list use by > the USGenWeb Project and is not any in any sense an official organ of > our state project, the banishment should not have reached into our state > unit. In fact, very few of our TGW volunteers subscribe to that list. > > With that being said, Pam was also blocked from posting to our closed > state CC list - a list that she was required to use. Now that does > involve our state project! And your removal of your outstanding Johnson > Co. TN page certainly is great loss for our state unit. > > It has been suggested to me that Dr. B has made great contributions to > the USGenWeb Project and I make no claims otherwise. I have been told > that the last event that caused the banishment may have been "the straw > that broke the camel's back," and that may be so. But that is not the > point here. > > The point really is, the banishment is censorship. To stifle the voice > of dissent is to stifle the voice of freedom, the voice of America. > > None of us really like to hear criticisms of our actions and the voices > of the dissenter can be very annoying. Yet one synonym for the word > dissenter is "protestant." All of us genealogists know what that means. > Dissidence is in our blood. It is our right! Our forefathers earned that > right for us. > > Fred Smoot >