[ale] Ale subscribers

[Aaron Ruscetta]

Still my opinion that this is a crock of panic driven over-reaction.

The problem is a valid concern, but the implications seem greatly
exaggerated and the causes are pure emotional speculation of one
individual that is seriously lacking in evidence.  The real sources
of the problem have not been rationally evaluated, so the method of
addressing it is reactive, extremist and aggressively ignorant.  This
might fly at a teabagger terrorist rally, but it has no place here.

The whole discussion is being so inappropriately manipulated that
I am finding it a huge argument for abandoning ALE and moving
on myself.  I'll sit with it a few days to cool off and let y'all know.

in peace,
aaron




On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Jim Lynch
<ale_nospam at fayettedigital.com> wrote:
> On 10/16/2013 12:11 AM, Michael B. Trausch wrote:
>
> I move to quash the motion.  I think that Jim has done his job quite well,
> and far better than I could ever have had the patience to do.  He found a
> compromise solution that involves absolutely zero censorship.  Others called
> for the targeted moderation of individuals.
>
> Sorry I should have said, I second a motion for quashing.  I agree with
> Mike.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>