>that if he's going to quote someone directly, however, he would give them a
>call if not to get their permission, at least to verify that the person said
>what he/she said and meant what it appears to mean.
I will not, repeat will never print what I read in here unless I've called
the writer first and asked permission. The ethical implications of not
heeding that are frightening.
>2. I am free to hold a discussion and have ideas without having an
>obligation to air them for publication. If I air them in a public place,
>then I have to take the risk that they will be heard by people I don't know
>are listening. I think we are now all aware that the Daily News is
>listening and expect that anything we say on this list might somehow find
>its way into the newspaper. That gives us a choice as to how public we want
>to be with our ideas. Choosing NOT to say something publicly, Greg, is not
>censorship or somehow inhibiting the free flow of information. It is a
>personal choice.
I respect personal choice and I respect this medium as unique, new and
rather boundless at times. We're all learning. Do not expect anyting you
say here to make it into the newspaper. I certainly don't have the time or
the energy, and I believe it would be an invasion without prior consent.
This cybersphere should remain free and open.
Thank you, greg