At 03:21 PM 7/17/2000 -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>At 4:50 PM -0400 7/17/00, murr rhame wrote:
>
>>As you may have noticed, I'm strongly opposed to unverified
>>$ubscriptions... This could be a very important case indeed.
>
>
>Definitely, on all sorts of levels.
>
>I'm going to not comment on it, other than to say I'm going to keep
>an eye on it. I can argue all sorts of issues all sorts of ways, and
>I'm curious to see both sides put the cards on the table.
>
>>We'll see what the courts say.
>
>Hopefully. Unless someone blinks. And it'll be interesting to see if
>"the media" picks up on this and figures out what's going on, because
>this case has sort of slid under the radar screen so far, and has all
>sorts of issues, including those of self-defined standards and how
>far they can be imposed on others, and the limits (if any) to that
>approach on the larger internet (i.e, when does a group like MAPS
>become large enough that it wields enough power that it should no
>longer be allowed to do so without some official endorsement)
See the info at http://www.orbs.org/ for some claims about the misuse of MAPS.
I used to be a real MAPS fan. Now I'm beginning to be bothered.
--
We will fight for bovine freedom, And hold our large heads high.
We will run free, with the buffalo or die! Cows with Guns.
- Dana Lyons, Cows With Guns
Nick Simicich mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html -- Stop by and Light Up The World!
