On 05/04/07, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
I'd also say that if he wishes to erase this scandal, he should pursue it with the local paper that printed the story, and such papers as the Village Voice that reprinted it. We are not the ones converting a rumor to permanent record here.
I don't see any conceptual difference between us picking it up from a paper and republishing it, to the Village Voice picking it up from a paper and republishing it... does it somehow become more legitimate three or four transactions down the chain?