>>>>>>>Uh huh, nice try. I have a bridge for sale.... cheap....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't understand what you were trying to say to me, but I guess it doesn't matter.
>>>>>
>>>>>You said you just found the message from Ed and just posted it without any ulterior motive. I am saying that's ridiculous, you knew exactly what you're doing when you posted it.
>>>>
>>>>Interesting interpretation. What she actually said was ...so I brought it up as related to the topic. The fact that the opinion on the twit filter that Ed's post expresses is diametrically opposed to Naomi's makes it it difficult for me to see why you'd be impugning her motives.
>>>
>>>I think she did it as a way of saying, "Ok, even Ed agrees with almost everyone else regarding the Twit Filter. Since I have always had great respect for Ed, Peter and I must be wrong and I'm going to stop arguing and whining about it." I'm with John on this one; seems quite clear to me.
>>
>>I wish you'd ALL stop freakin whining about it.
>>
>>It's just a bickering match.
>
>This has been an interesting thread. My thought is that a twit filter is a form of the restriction of freedom of speech and it should be removed.

I disagree. Nobody is suggesting that anyone be prevented from speaking. Only that there be freedom from listening.

I have never twit filtered anyone but respect the right of others to do so. To me the wish to not listen outweighs the wish to insist on being heard by all.