Archie-

I don't really want to get into a huge debate over this since I've had it frequently with so many others. But I do want to make sure that you at least understand my point (whether you agree with it or not is unimportant).

The single provision of the Slabfree pledge that has prevented me from signing on is the promise not to do business with any dealer who sells slabbed chips. Yes, you have the RIGHT to say that. However, it is not an attitude that encourages the open trade in competing ideas.

What if we were to apply that to any other type of opinion. If someone were in favor of military action in Iraq, he probably still read a paper that offered both pro-war editorials and anti-war editorials. He may read both editorials because he wanted to hear both opinions. He may only read the pro-war editorials, because he had thoroughly researched it and made up his mind and had no need for alternate opinions. But if that person and a bunch of his friends were to sign a petition telling the paper that if it ever printed an anti-war editorial they would never buy the paper again, then I think that would be bullying, and while completely legal, it would run contrary to Jefferson's views on freedom. Particularly if 90% of the market were pro-war, and most of them signed the petition in an attmept to bully the paper into only reporting the side they believed in.

Now I realize that the debate on a war is not the same as a debate on slabbing casino chips. However, I think the same principles apply. I am one of those card-carrying ACLU types who actually buy into the idea of "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to my death your right to say it." SO I will of course defend your RIGHT to boycott (which is not in and of itself a negative term) dealers who sell slabbed chips. At the same time I will defned those dealers RIGHT to sell those chips (as I know you also defend). But more importantly, I would prefer to live in a world where they made their decision to sell them or not sell for their own reasons, not out of a fear of being "blacklisted" by the majority of their customers if they dare cater to the minority as well. In fact, I might be more tempted to buy non-slabbed chips from them just to make up for the hundreds of club members who refuse to buy from them.

Anyway, as I said, there's no need to debate the topic. I've made my point as best I can hope, and if you have anything to add I'll respectfully allow you the last word on this one. I just wanted you to understand where I'm coming from. And yes, I do think that my viewpoint is extraordinarily Jeffersonian, and the opposing view is contrary to Jefferson's philosophy -- which is the only reason that I raised the topic again.