>> Doesn't look that way. Hypothetically, if someone wanted to create an
>> actual, functioning echo in which to have open discussions over the
>> value of the listing process, I would guess that would probably fly.
>> The same thing happened in another instance where it was determined
>> that "The echo is a legitimate one in use by private users."
>> But if someone wanted to have an actual, functioning echo, they
>> probably wouldn't claim that it originated from "the twilight
zone." A
>> list keeper could easily feel that it constituted a waste of time and
>> an abuse of the process. Now, if that same person were to log into a
>> BBS in another zone, submit the identical request to the echolist
>> right down to the "twilight zone" reference, and get it
ACCEPTED, then
>> you would have some solid basis to claim a zone bias.

>Yes please put the focus on the specific contents of my echolisting, instead o
> the real issue: The listing by Roy, and the actions of the keeper in response
> to them. Both listings were meant to annoy, the keeper removed 1, and didn't
> remove the other, it's really simple...

If that was the "real issue," then you were annoyed by the
existence of his private-distributed echo of that name, not just the
listing of it. Would this call for a rule that says that no echoes shall
have annoying names?

My guess is that Roy may have been annoyed when the echo named
"WITTLESS" was created years ago, but I do not know if he whined
to the list keeper to strike it. And in fact in the matter you are
discussing Roy later commented that "Had Vlist asked the person who
listed it to remove it, rather than attempt to get it removed by
threatening the EK, it may not have remained listed."

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Dada-2