[OT] Re: [OT] Re: .br blacklisted ?

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 08:22:28PM -0500, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> 	I already run several sugarplum sites with teergrubes.  I also use
> various blackhole lists and take other action against spammers, including
> blocking entire rogue domains.  If that rogue domain happens to be a two
> letter TLD, so be it.  If it gets bad enough, maybe they'll fix it.

You are suggesting that it is acceptable to implement technological
barriers to a minority expressing speech that is unacceptable to the
majority. This is not acceptable.

When you subscript your mailbox to list of 'spammers' to avoid associating
with them, with the knowledge that you may lose some valuable mail, that is
fine.

The situation is similar to not visiting a gay bar if you don't like
homosexual people. However, that is not what you are doing blocking whole
countries. That is like building concrete barriers around cites to punish
them for not oppressing their own minority citizen ("I'm going to block your
whole country until you outlaw this class of speech I find offensive").

Spam is not good, but destroying freedom is worse. I suggest that every
person who is eager to use oppressive technological measures to stop spammers
please consider the potential wider consequences.

Today the majority thinks spam is wrong, today you are a part of the
majority. The Internet should always avoid the tyranny of the masses, even
when it's operators are a part of the 'mass' today. Tomorrow the issue will
not be spam, and you might not be in the majority.