maybe UO's concern was the suggestion on the list that
a particular list member should be taken out and
beaten to a pulp. If that was the reason for
reprimanding the list, I agree wholeheartedly.
Sean
--- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 11:40 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: t-and-f: RE:Malmo post
> >
> >
> > In a message dated Mon, 30 Apr 2001 1:51:55 AM
> Eastern Daylight
> > Time, "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > << Took a break from the list to protest the
> censorship Nazis at UO.>>
> >
> > While I'd not use such a harsh word as nazis, I
> have remained a
> > lurker for the last month, stewing over just how
> to react to the
> > over-reaction to the Leilani Rios post.
> >
> > What really bothers me is that I'm having trouble
> believing that
> > the rather tame original post and the few bits of
> thread that
> > were allowed to follow it were enough to set off
> alarm bells in
> > the halls of Duckademia. Rather, it seems obvious
> to me that some
> > list member(s) must have raised a major stink with
> the
> > university; yapping to the point that the school
> had no choice
> > but to step in and get draconian.
> >
> >
>
> The UO would defend your right to post a
> self-portrait of Robert
> Mapplethorpe with a bull whip protruding from a
> place where is doesn't
> belong, but a naked chick with track spikes?
>
> malmo
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
