SCN Board Candidates and alt.sex.your.worst.nightmare

[Kurt Cockrum]

In a recent posting <199506012104.OAA06165 at scn.org> Bob K. said:
>  I would like to request that the alt.sex.* groups be part of the SCN
>  newsfeed.  [...]
>  [...]                                                        SCN practices
>  what it preaches and does not censor the newsfeed.  [...]
>  [...]
>  I sincerely hope that when faced with its own real world decisions on what
>  were previously theoretical commitments to free speech that SCN does not
>  waver.  Protecting controversial speech is the first principle in the SCN 
>  policy statement.  If we water down our free speech commitment, I would be
>  in favor of just deleting it altogether from the policy statement.
>

Well said, Bob!

Apropos of this, Aki recently posted in
<9506012225.AA08793 at grace.rt.cs.boeing.com> a list of nominees for the initial
SCN board.  I think it important that the candidates be *explicit* or at least
truthful about the boundaries of what they consider acceptable discourse in
public-access computer systems.  I urge voters to take note of waffling,
vagueness and dogmatism, as well as wisdom, thoughtfulness and experience.

Questions to be asked of prospective candidates might include:
o	To what extent do your personal views on controversial discourse
	influence your role as director of a public grouping?  What conflicts
	exist, if any?  Why or why not?
o	What constitutes "harmful speech"? What does not?
	Is there any difference between bodily injury, hurt feelings and/or
	offended sensibilities?  Are the differences, if any, of degree or kind?
o	Would you defend advocacy of activities or views you disapprove of?
	Does legality or illegality make any difference? Why or why not?
o	What are examples of legitimate intervention? illegitimate
	intervention?

-- kurt