> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Betancourt [SMTP:email@example.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 1998 11:02 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: guidelines for conduct
> Hi All,
> Let me begin with: This isn't an attack on those who have
> suggested we adopt guidelines.
> I'm just explaining why I feel they are not a good idea:
> While I can understand what guidelines might sound like a good
> idea -- and most ISPs do have something called a TOS (terms of
> service) which do constitute guidelines for conduct, I have to
> state my complete feeling against such guides for art.net.
> Guidelines of this type constitute a prior restraint on the
> speech of everyone who lives under them, in effect becoming a
> speech code which can lead to a feeling of censorship. That
> art.net does not have these is a sign its strength.
> Let me be the first to say that I feel Mr. Smylie has a perfect
> right to make any kinds of statements about me or my work. To
> deny him that though a guidelines for conduct (a speech code)
> would be to deny his right to say what he wishes to say. I feel
> this is wrong. He can say what he wants, either to
> email@example.com or to me personally -- I will simply continue
> forwarding the messages to the forum where they belong. Under no
> conditions do I want any kind of constrain to come out of this.
> Artists@art.net constitutes a free marketplace for ideas, and by
> allowing him (or anyone) to say exactly what he (or they) want is
> a good thing. It allows us to know who feels what about art.net
> and what happens here. This seems essential to the way we have
> functioned in the past.
> As to the level of hostility from Mr. Smylie, I realize that
> while he is using me for target practice, it is not something I
> can take personally having gone though assaults on my work, my
> self and my opinions before. It feels appropriate that I should
> act protect his right to attack me.