CompuServe Messages

Ben, Don't get me wrong, I can understand why CS would be super sensitive to any hint of impropriety. >>I<< would if I were them. However, I think their approach (which, as I understand it, is based on 'offensiveness') is unworkable. For a discussion as to why I feel that way, please see my messages to Don and Steve. Your comment about 'conforming' is dead on target. We all conform to situations which we may have reservations about, in order to get along. But I can turn that argument around and say that, in the present instance, other people should conform to my approach. After all, in the abstract, who decides which method of communication is the 'correct' one? And if you go with 'conforming to the majority', you've taken the first step on the very slippery road to tyranny…as history has shown time and again. That's why the Supreme Court and several generations of extremely intelligent legal minds have not yet been able to nail down a workable definition of obscenity and a set of rules for when 'censorship' is 'justified'. My goodness, from one word in a BBS message to global political catastrophe in three days! Self-referencing rules make my head ache.. – Mark p.s. — I suspect the best 'workable' definition for enterprises like CS is that of lack of oversight couple with a fervent hope nobody crosses that ill-defined and very subjective invisible line…