Shawgi,
I know that you do not think well of me, especially as
I am the person who "attacked" you in the past in a way not
approved of by Michael Perelman. But I do not support your
removal from the list.
Some time ago I gave you some advice, which you did
not follow, and apparently you now have all kinds of people
on your case because of that (not me, I have not responded
to a post of yours in a long time; swore off that stuff).
I repeat, cut back the number of your postings and be a lot
more selective regarding what you post. Michael does not
want stuff about Israel. The Ontario stuff is a joke as
are a lot of your generic ideological screeds. What I find
of some interest and what I think a lot of those who
support your presence find of some interest are your
postings about certain areas of the world that do not get
much coverage in the mainstream media. But even the volume
of these should probably be carefully edited by you.
Good luck, and for once listen to your old
"anti-discussion, low-cultured" nemesis, :-).
Barkley Rosser
On Sat, 19 Oct 1996 15:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Michael Perelman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do not consider the question about Shawgi to be censorship. I
> personally do not find his postings objectionable. On subjects that do
> not interest me I can easily delete them.
>
> Some people do pay by the message. Others pay for the time that they
> spend on the net.
>
> My interest here is not in silencing Shawgi. If he were someone who was
> just trying to tweak us, I would think that he should use his time
> better.
>
> Many people did write me on and off pen-l about being offended by
> Shawgi. Very few people expressed a problem with his political stance,
> except in the case of Israel and the charge of being a Stalinist.
>
> I did not like and still do not like the way people attacked him in the
> past. I expressed my concern about that behavior.
>
> Both Bill and Susan say that they found his posting, at least
> occassionally, useful.
>
> I suspect, and I had mentioned this to Shawgi, that his format might be
> better suited to a Usenet group.
>
> Now to the question of censorship. Here some of us have different
> philosophies. I regard pen-l as a private space for people to do
> progressive politics. By that standard, Shawgi belongs. I also try to
> do what I can to make it a productive and enjoyable space. I would not
> want us to get into the diatribes of the marxism list. Nor would I like
> to see tedious debates with conservatives rehashing old ideas that we
> have all heard. Finally, I hope, as we all do, that we have seen the
> end of the person hawking stuff on pen-l.
>
> In recent days, more and more of our time was taken up by Shawgi. In
> that sense, his presence was counterproductive. His only other offense
> might be the time and money taken up by his posting for those that pay.
>
> Shawgi told me that he would leave if I insisted, but wanted me to
> reconsider. I do not want to get us tied up in endless debates about
> who and who should not be here and whom we will and will not tolerate.
> I am going to wait for three days to respond to Shawgi.
>
> One final note: PLEASE, whether you do or do not appreciate his
> contributions to pen-l, do not taunt him -- or anyone else.
>
>
> --
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> Chico, CA 95929
>
> Tel. 916-898-5321
> E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Rosser Jr, John Barkley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
