Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (44197)	9/15/2002 5:56:23 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Don't patronize me, John. If I think something is so ludicrous that the act of posting it here is questionable, I will say so, your sensitivities notwithstanding. Who's trying to censor who?

To: JohnM who wrote (44197)	9/15/2002 8:54:04 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Are you trying to censor Scott's posts, C2? Don't. John, were you trying to "censor" LindyBill or me when you called Steyn "objectionable" and Lewis "simplistic"? Of course not; criticism is not censorship, even if it says, this stuff is ridiculous, did you even read what you posted? There is a large camp of intellectuals today who are crying censorship merely because they are being criticized. Please don't join them. What do we live for around here but (hopefully intelligent) criticism? I found these cries particular absurd when Susan Sontag lamented recently -- "I'm being censored! I'm only being published in the op-ed pages of the NY Times!" Puh-lease. The act of posting is not an act of signaling one agrees with the content of the post. In fact, it should not. But it generally does. However, it should signify that the poster has read the piece and thinks that it's worth reading.