Re: OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- From: Doug <jagmad@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:51:25 -0800 (PST)
On 20 Jan, 08:36, Mark Goodge <use...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:33:39 -0800 (PST), Doug put finger to keyboardIncorrectly as it turned out since there is is no OT rule for UKT.
and typed:
On 19 Jan, 22:29, Peter Hill <peter.usen...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:42:39 -0800 (PST), Doug <jag...@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
All you posters of off topic threads on this NG had better watch out.
Guess who reported me to BT for posting an off topic thread to
uk.transport which, it was claimed by a BT employee, is against their
acceptable use policy and I was threatened with withdrawal of service.
'Posting messages to an online forum or newsgroup that violate the
rules of the forum or newsgroup.
Has this has never happened to you before? It was my understanding
that you have changed ISP quite a few times.
http://www.usenet.org.uk/hierarchy.html#uk.transport
Note "its environment" does not mean any aspect of climate change or
global warming. The M1, Paddington Station, Stansted airport, cars,
buses, trains, boats and planes etc. do not own or possess the
attribute "climate change". "Its environment" does relate to leaves on
the line, ice on roads, wildlife in hedgerows, verges or end of
runway, hedgerow or trees overgrowing highway or fallen on line,
condition of waiting rooms, tracks, roads, bridges, signalling,
signage and other aspects the transport infrastructure.
So you say but then, who are you? A Usenet nobody at Demon. Is that
the best you can do, no sources at all?
Peter Hill is correct in his interpretation of the charter. Just
because it's pretty brief and doesn't formally list what is off-topic
doesn't mean that you can post anything.
Now, this group is not moderated, and therefore has no-one to enforce
the charter in terms of what is actually posted. But ISPs can, and do
(as you have found out) take account of what is generally considered
acceptable in a group when determining whether their AUP has been
breached.
Mob rule with no accountability, eh? Typical!
Ultimately, the decision as to what is acceptable is made by
the majority of users of the group, as well as those whose remit it is
to oversee the groups in uk.*.
In the real world when a new newsgroup is formed any possible
restrictions are fully discussed and, in effect, put to a vote.
Presumably this was done when UKT started, hence no OT posting rule,
end of story. If you want to add any restrictions I suggest you get in
touch with the appropriate Usenet forum. Until then UKT will remain
its usual anarchic free-for-all and your attempts to impose censorship
should be treated with the derision it deserves. Failing that, why not
migrate to a moderated group where your sensibilities will not be
disturbed?
--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's democracy is another man's regime.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- From: Doug
- Re: OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- From: Peter Hill
- Re: OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- From: Doug
- Re: OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- From: Mark Goodge
- OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- Prev by Date: Re: OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- Next by Date: Re: Crackdown on uninsured vehicles.
- Previous by thread: Re: OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- Next by thread: Re: OT not acceptable use or just more attempts at censorship?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
