Re: [Leica] Freedom of expression and responsibility

["Guido Soprano" <guidosoprano@hotmail.com>]

Bryan

ABSOLUTELY. I have opined similarly to DonJnumbers and 79xxxx. Their 
reponsive silence was deafening.

Vaclav was right; paraphrasing him, passive people won't use laws, and 
aggressive people will ignore them - which gives two options to 
passive/agressives.

Guido

(who stays the same even tho' his constitution is constantly amended.)


>From: "Bryan Caldwell" <bcaldwell@softcom.net>
>Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Freedom of expression and responsibility
>Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 07:57:28 -0700
>
>As one of the resident attorneys here (ducking . . . <g> ), I need to point
>out that the First Amendment doesn't apply to this list. There are many
>members who are not contributing from the United States, and, even in the
>U.S., the First Amendment protects against government regulation of speech 
>-
>not the negative responses of others. As long as the government is not
>regulating the content of the LUG, the First Amendment does not come in to
>play.
>
>Bryan
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Sent: Monday, May 31, 1999 1:44 AM
>Subject: [Leica] Freedom of expression and responsibility
>
>
> > Recently one contributor to this list seems to be under the impression
>that
> > some members of this list are opposed to expression of opinions or
> > presenatation of factual  information that are critical or negative 
>about
> > Leica manufacturing quality,  current management practices, future 
>product
> > strategy or you name it. And feel the need to invoke the first amandment
>to
> > defend the right to say whatever they deem necessary.
> > I feel inclined to propose that any person on this list who thinks (s)he
> > needs any defense to express any view about any topic that even slightly
> > tangents the Leica world, has not grasped the essence of this list 
>and/or
> > the fabric between its many contributors.
> > On the other hand freedom of speech has a necessary corollary and that 
>is
> > responsibility for what is being stated or opiniated.
> > In the scientific/technical/journalistic world where I roam about, 
>anybody
> > can express any thought, even the wildest guess is acceptable and
> > tolerated. But if some person makes erroneous or unproven
> > statements,produces illogical reasoning or draws conclusions based on
>shaky
> > evidence, then anybody can question these opinions or statements.
> > In fact one can ignore the disputed statements ( a most sensible stance)
>or
> > one can bring evidence or reasoning to the contrary.
> > If on this list somebody's statements or views are questioned or
>challenged
> > or ignored, then this is not an act of repression by the socalled 
>"board"
> > (a non-entity in fact), it is just the logical and entirely natural
> > consequence of the free speech principle. Anyone may formulate wrong or
> > illresearched statements/opinions, but anyone else may say that this or
> > that opinion/fact is wrong or illresearched or just plain stupid. That 
>is
> > also part of the free speech principle.
> > I am a very firm believer in that most elegant procedure called 
>scientific
> > reasoning, where content prevails above the individual person who made
> > available the content. Solid fact finding by  methodological inquiry,
> > subsequent reasoning by logical laws and carefully formulated 
>conclusions
> > based on accepted facts are the basis of progress and insight.
> > Science and technology do progress because there is a common body of
> > knowledge that all practitioners adhere to.
> > To assume that because of a faulty pressure plate Leica quality in 
>general
> > has withered away, that the current Leica management consists of bean
> > counters throwing away the quality standards established by the Leitz
> > family (if that would be a true fact) is a shaky if not wrong 
>conclusion.
> > One is entitled to have this view. One is also entitled to dismiss it. 
>Be
> > careful: the view is dismissed, not the person who has this opinion.
> >
> > Erwin
>


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com