81 lines
3.5 KiB
Plaintext
81 lines
3.5 KiB
Plaintext
From bad@wonder.UUCP Mon Apr 3 17:16:54 1989
|
||
From: bad@wonder.UUCP (Bad Temperton)
|
||
Subject: The last word on the rec.porn.child debate
|
||
|
||
Hello. I'm Bad Temperton. You probably know me best as the
|
||
moderator of the wildly popular newsgroup, rec.porn.child.
|
||
There have been some misconceptions about this newsgroup
|
||
flying around lately, and I'd like to clear them up for you,
|
||
free of charge.
|
||
|
||
First, some background. Rec.porn.child was set up a couple
|
||
of years ago because a lot of people were tired of the drivel
|
||
in rec.porn and wanted something a bit more, well, special.
|
||
I volunteered to take some time off my arduous job as net
|
||
know-it-all to become the moderator.
|
||
|
||
Since then, it's become clear that there is a real market
|
||
for "young stuff" out there. I'm pleased to say that its
|
||
readership now numbers 500,000 readers solar-system-wide,
|
||
including all newsreaders in Arizona, the undergraduate
|
||
population of Warwick University, and the entire backbone
|
||
cabal.
|
||
|
||
There was some unfortunate controversy last fall about the
|
||
article entitled "How to Kidnap One for Yourself". I'm
|
||
pleased to say that this controversy has now been proven
|
||
to be completely unfounded.
|
||
|
||
I agree that the article was probably illegal. I agree
|
||
that it was probably offensive to all people who were
|
||
molested as children, all people who know anyone who was
|
||
molested, all people who have ever had children, and all
|
||
people who have ever been children. But these people are
|
||
probably a minority, albeit a vocal one.
|
||
|
||
So I'm glad there were so many people who supported so well
|
||
my right to send them anything they want to read. After all,
|
||
Absolute Freedom of Speech is almost the Most Important Thing
|
||
(second only to the Net itself). So I think we should continue
|
||
to silence those who think petty concerns like human dignity
|
||
are more important. The only way to keep Usenet the perfect
|
||
place to practise freedom of speech is to keep it almost
|
||
totally devoid of real-world concerns like the law and money.
|
||
|
||
Which brings me to the issue of my contract with the Devil.
|
||
|
||
Some people have objected to this plan, saying that it is
|
||
against the supposedly "anarchistic" Spirit of Usenet. Some
|
||
people have even called Usenet "the best argument against
|
||
anarchy ever put forward". In fact, Usenet is not an
|
||
anarchy. It is a libertarian Bradarchy, to get technical.
|
||
|
||
This means, roughly, that as more and more public institutions
|
||
pay to maintain it, the greed of some of its users will
|
||
reach a "critical mass" and they will try to take advantage
|
||
of it. This accords well with my political philosophy, which
|
||
is that (1) there should be no public institutions, and that
|
||
(2) everyone should be allowed to do anything they want.
|
||
(Except my employees, of course, but you have to draw the line
|
||
somewhere.)
|
||
|
||
My contract with the Devil is basically this. I give him a
|
||
newsfeed, for which he pays me $5,000/Kbyte. In return, he
|
||
gets to claim the mortal souls of all Usenetters who flame
|
||
others unnecessarily. I took a vote on this in alt.satanism,
|
||
since that seemed the place I was most likely to get support,
|
||
and I'm pleased to say it was very favourable.
|
||
|
||
For exact details, you can contact the Devil at
|
||
|
||
...!drugbaron!ayatollahvax!terriites!kremvax!jtower
|
||
|
||
but rest assured that this is a very mutually beneficial
|
||
arrangement. I make a profit, and, as everyone will agree,
|
||
within six months he'll have everyone on the Net.
|
||
|
||
Yours for a "free" Usenet,
|
||
--
|
||
Bad Temperton, Wonderland Wetware Ltd. -- Spuzzum, BC 604/555-1313
|
||
|
||
|