Tuesday, November 10, 2009

What SafeLibraries Doesn't Want You To Read.

Responding to posts on SafeLibraries' blog is often a dicey matter for me, since I find it very difficult to understand what he thinks does or does not constitute a personal attack.  He often accuses me of attacking him personally, when it appears to me I am only addressing the issues he's brought up.  Case in point is his post of Monday, November 9th, and my responses.  I only have some of that traffic, since he deleted my comments. You be the judge:

Non-Censor said...

Who is being unfair to whom? It is not fair of you to accuse me of personal attacks when all I have done is respond to the claims you yourself have made.
You DID say the firings took place overnight, and when I said you were incorrect about that I was not stating my personal opinion, but was referring to information provided in the Lexington Herald-Leader. I said so, and I provided a link to the article. 
You are right that we disagree greatly about the ALA, but I have no reason or desire to paint them as angels. I just don't see why you heap blame on an advisory organization for legal matters they have no regulatory control over, or local library decisions they did not make.
I suppose you could say the ALA indirectly supported this by suggesting to member libraries that they allow any patron to check out any non-obscene book. But that is not just ALA ideology, but a reasonable interpretation of Free Speech law.
My comments about the "bestiality" book were not meant to belittle or besmirch you in any way. YOU brought it up, linking to that in your main post. I never would have mentioned it if you hadn't tried to use it as evidence to support your position.
And you did not answer my question. What legal principle or precedent do you think would allow the citizens of Jessamine County do do as you suggest, to override the legal structure already laid out by local government, to override professionally trained librarians, to alter library policy to conform to "community view," and even replace the board if they stand in the way? And when all of that is said and done, what shape do you think the new library policies, conforming to "community views," can be? What existing law allows Black Dossier to be handled by any library in Kentucky in a way that is different from what has already been don?
Tue Nov 10, 10:49:00 PM 2009
And his response was:
SafeLibraries said...
I am removing the comments of "Non-Censor" as he has resorted to personal attack, my blog posts are filled with his personal attacks, I recently got him to address the issues, but he has returned to personal attack.
Tue Nov 10, 11:17:00 PM 2009

1 comment:

  1. Sure sounds like Ginny M. Birds of a feather.