In article <1992Jul17.200720.25581 at jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> johnk at jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (John J Kuszewski) writes:
>>>>It is perfectly legal to discuss the importance of science funding,
>but it is illegal to give partisan support for one candidate or
>another on this group.
>> I'm certain that any such rule as this would be counter to the First
Amendment, and couldn't be considered valid.
Are you saying that I can say "More money for science is good.", but
I can't say "Candidate A would give more money for science than candidate
B"? Along with the logical extention that if you agree with the first
statment you should vote for A.
Political arguments shouldn't go on here. But I believe there is no
legal rule that can stop them. Indeed, what if the roving Greek/Turk
political flame war was to visit bionet.general? Specifically how would
it be stopped?
Group charters are by convention. Outside of moderating all the bionet
groups, you, me, and the NSF must realize that we cannot _control_ the
content of the articles.
I am saying that politcial discussion _should_ not go on here. But
taking a hyperlegalistic tone and shouting "It is illegal to say that here"
is not productive and wrongminded.
DanZ
--
This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.
