Please. Speak your mind. If you don't like what I say, say something about it.

I would point out that context is an important part of any communication. I emphatically did not say that I think being verbally obnoxious, abusive, or as you put it, act like a jerk was a good idea, nor did I advocate it.

My point, since you obviously didn't get it the first time, was that if you limit one person's expression (whether that be via law, custom, culture or social pressure), you diminish us all, and set a dangerous precedent.

What is more, your morality is not my morality. Nor is it anyone else's. Morality is our behavior based on the moral choices each of us makes when confronted with a moral choice. That is not a group activity. Each individual must make their own moral choices and be willing to accept responsibility for the actions they take based on their individual moral choices.

I specifically noted that it is an open question as to whether Linus Torvalds' speech is helpful or not. But it's not my place (nor is it yours or the GP's) to attempt to restrict Mr. Torvalds' freedom of expression. If you don't like what he says, say so. Even better, explain why you don't like it. Perhaps you'll convince him.

What is more, I replied to SuperBanana's assertion that:

I specifically said: it's fine to tell people they did something wrong. What you may not do is be abusive.

Where exactly did I twist things in my response? How is my response a straw man? Perhaps I'm just a bit slow, but I don't get it.

N.B. This is more rope for you. Please, by all means, take it.

Your complaint about my word choice is wrong too. Strawman indeed.

Please carry on and don't take anything I wrote here as an admonition to cease expressing yourself. I would recommend that you give a little more thought to the things you say, folks might take you a bit more seriously if you did.

Justice Brandeis was and is correct that "... the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."

An excellent point, which fits nicely with the claim that the remedy is more speech, not censorship. And "Political Correctness" is a framework for cultural censorship.

That's not to say that I think courtesy and politeness are passe. Quite the contrary, in fact. However, Linus has continued to speak plainly, does not suffer fools gladly, and generally embeds (at least IME) his sharp (and often salty) comments in a matrix of humor and good sense.

How's this? Fuck you. You gonna arrest me now?

Actually, I can be abusive if I choose to be. It may not win me many friends and it may alienate the ones I do have, but I can certainly do so if I want.

Whether or not Linus advances Linux because of, or in spite of, being abusive is an open question.

As Louis Brandeis (and correctly, IMHO) pointed out, "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the process of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."

The FCC works for the American people, if we want something, that should be sufficient reason to rule in our favor."

I assume that was an attempt at humor? Either that or you need to stop smoking that stuff before posting. The FCC hasn't worked for the American people in at least a decade.

It was on the tee-vee, friend. :)

Actually, I wasn't responding to you in particular. Your post prompted me to express my thoughts about symmetrical bandwidth in general, and was not meant as a jab at you. Sigh.

Actually, I can proceed as I choose. As can you (not pretending to give you permission, just pointing out what is). If you choose to interpret my statements in a way I didn't intend, that's your privilege. Language is inexact and without other, non-language cues as to my, as you put it, "attitude" I can see why you might interpret my writing that way. I suspect that your idea that I have some axe to grind with you (which I assure you, I don't) is based on the fact we disagree.

Your assessment of my state of mind is of no concern to me. Feel free to interpret me (or not) as you like. It doesn't irk me that you think I'm being disingenuous, although it does raise the idea that perhaps I should be more explicit in the future. In any case, please do carry on. Once again, have a nice day!

Note that I most certainly did not say that those who disagree with me are probably brain-dead. I said that if the examples I gave weren't enough to elucidate my point that:

It seems to me that providing symmetric high-speed connections is critical to the future of free speech, innovation, creative output and communications the world over.

I don't count disagreeing with me as not getting the idea. Given your response, you clearly did "get the idea" even though you disagree.

It seems you took offense at something not meant for you. Are you feeling a bit stressed today? Perhaps a cold drink, a massage, and some soothing music will calm you. Or not. It's not my concern. Nor is the fact that you disagree with me. I'm okay with that too.

I asserted that symmetric bandwidth was important to our society in a variety of ways, and gave several (IMHO clear and concise) examples as to why I believe that. Take from that what you will. Or not. Either way, have a nice day!

I know. Recognizing sarcasm isn't your strong suit, eh?

You're absolutely right. Those people don't deserve to live here, thinking they can come to this country and have their descendants live here too! And all those wetback children using our diapers are a disgrace! We Americans have been here since the beginning of the American continent, formed as the super-continent Pangaea broke up starting about 175 million years ago. Immigrants must be stopped. They never gave us anything but trouble. But why stop with just keeping out the immigrants and limiting procreation (that's worked out really well in China, no?)? Let's get Swiftian on their asses! MMMM babies!

It seems to me that providing symmetric high-speed connections is critical to the future of free speech, innovation, creative output and communications the world over.

When I can serve up my documentary on government malfeasance and allow dozens, if not hundreds of other people to pull my content easily -- and those folks can then host it for tens or hundreds of thousands more people, it becomes much harder for the "big lie" to succeed.

When I can host my own "social network" that links to those people I give a crap about, and there's no corporate slime drooling all over my personal data because I own *and* host it (think Diaspora) and my friends and connections host their own servers that I can connect or not connect with -- at my discretion, some semblance of privacy is recovered.

When I can write my own software or music or literature and distribute it without the (economic) censorship of the corporate world stifling me or that same crowd sucking up most of the profits, innovation and creativity will blossom.

I could go on, but if you don't get the idea by now, you're probably brain-dead.