[Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

[Ray Saintonge]

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/7/11 Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>:
>   
>> I've restored the comments that I was replying to since you deleted them
>> to wilfully mischaracterize my "ROTFL" as applying to the general issue
>> rather than your silly comments.
>>
>> I've yet to see any evidence that you know what you are talking about.
>> Your opposition to any kind of free speech on this by making up stories
>> about potential harm prove this.  Just because your contributions are
>> entirely unproductive doesn't mean that this applies to what many others
>> are saying.  I may not agree with all of them, but I would not find that
>> sufficient reason to suppress them.
>>     
>
> Would I be right in assuming that you are American? You certainly have
> that religious view of free speech that is typical of Americans...
> This has nothing to do with suppression of free speech, it has to do
> with being responsible about what you say. I am not a legal expert and
> I have no spoken to Derrick about his wishes, which is why I am being
> very careful about what I say and do. All I am asking is that other
> people in the same position show the same restraint.
I'm Canadian, which means that I am familiar with the American 
propaganda on some of these matters, though I can be equally critical of 
Americans in other areas, or, in the sense of [[John Ralston Saul]], I 
have learned to live with such complexities that are a part of the 
Canadian collective unconscious.  Under the circumstances your 
misperception is understandable and forgivable.

I have no complaint about your caution and restraint; I support that.  
There is ample reason to support the notion that Derrick's publication 
of that letter was unwise, but too, there are positive elements to that 
publication in that it opens up the conversation in much larger terms.  
The underlying issues inherent in NPG's attitudes have wider 
implications.  It is unfortunate that they often cannot be resolved 
outside of a specific legal case against a specific individual. Nothing 
that you, I, other list members or the denizens of Slashdot can say will 
have a direct effect on NPG v. Derrick if that ever becomes a real legal 
case.  Both sides will probably be advised by their own counsels to make 
no further public statements.  Those in a position to speak on behalf of 
WMF are also wise to severely limit their comments.

Before answering this I responded to comments by Gregory Maxwell, and 
the topics raised in that exchange by both sides.are probably the most 
constructive direction that this thread could take.

Ec