Open letter of complaint

[IED0DXM%UCLAMVS.BITNET@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]

Dear Pseudo-Moderator |>oug /\lan:
     IED is writing to complain about the consistently unfair
editorial advantage that you take in arguing on current and ongoing
Love-Hounds issues. He would greatly appreciate it if you could have
the decency to post IED's original postings without first chopping
them up with intrusive repartee of your own.
     All Love-Hounds except you have no choice but to write in their
own autonomous postings. This results in a completely fair exchange of
ideas. You, however, seem to feel that it is your prerogative as
moderator to re-edit IED's postings (and those of any other Love-Hound
you wish) _before_ the _original_ posting ever appears in Love-Hounds.
As the editor you unquestionably possess the power to do this, but
that power is just as unquestionably an _unfair_ one, and one which
you take excessive advantage of in your arguments with IED.
     It is understandably annoying to IED to find that a posting (such
as his recent lengthy consideration of _Suspended_) which IED spent
several hours working on appears in Love-Hounds butchered by you into
little info-bits punctuated by your own comments.  PLEASE HAVE THE
COURTESY TO LET IED HAVE HIS SAY _BEFORE_ MAKING YOUR RESPONSE.
     If you agree to do this, and to make your future responses to
IED's (and others') postings in your _own_separate_ postings, IED will
in turn make a greater effort to shorten the length of his own
admittedly wordy postings. But please don't use the length of a
Love-Hound's posting as an excuse for taking unfair editorial license.
IED used to think of this forum as a bastion of free speech, and he
would like to feel that this will become true again.

-- Andrew Marvick