Re: Flaming, Spam and Gate Crashing

>> PS- Your statement that: "'arguments' like the ones above in favor of
>> allowing the government to control the net are the best the other side
>> can offer..." is fairly telling. There was no implication that I was
>> espousing govt control (my position is the opposite).
>
> It seemed that you were. I'm happy to hear otherwise, although you can
> expect that even the most ardent supporters of government control of the
> net wouldn't admit that they are in favor of censorship and so on.
>
>
>> And what is this
>> "other side"? The issue of govt control is remarkably bi-partisan (or
>> multi-partisan). People always find a way to support govt control if it
>> promotes a cause they're interested in. E.g. The Left = Govt support of
>> "questionable" art. The Right = Govt control of media content. If life
>> was always a simple as their "side' and our "side"...

I think that it will come a time where some sort of "International Treaty of the Internet" will arrive. The questions regarding legal themes and the need for regulations are now becoming endless.

Although i am not in favour of both censorship and Internet law, I think it became a necessary evil. As more people have Internet access, what used to be a mostly academical environment became a commercial alternative and a way of entertainment for many many many people. Keeping this huge environment without any regulation may become the growth of a major problem for the future.

Dirceu Pereira
<dpsrosa[_at_]ax.ibase.org.br> Received on Mon Oct 30 1995 - 16:07:36 GMT