Re: pornography & the ``cypherpunk cause''

[Stanton McCandlish <mech@eff.org>]

LD:

[the comparison of EFF's note to CERT's, from L. Detweiler, that]
> appeared here seems to have completely escaped many, or perhaps
> everyone is intentionally evading it. The metaphor is extremely
> compelling. Both are sent to operators in order to bring something to
> their attention they `might' need to fix by an outside party generally
> interested in the operators own best interests. While I'm not sure that
> what CERT did was apropos, that warning was so *delicately worded*. In
> contrast the EFF announcement SHOUTS IN YOUR EAR. the CERT announcement
> was extremely diplomatic. the EFF announcement was SCREECHING.
> 
> Do `we' have *any* consistency, sophistication, or coherence as a
> group? Recent messages have DISMAYED me. is `our' philosophy nothing
> but Beavis&Butthead style ``Gubberment and the Fedz and Pigs are THINGS
> THAT SUCK and EFF is a THING THATS COOL.'' Or do `we' have no
[...]
> things like what has been called the `Tim May .sig Agenda' because some
> people might have strong opinions?

I won't speak for CPs at large on what is important to them, but I think
several things are a little off here.  To keep it short, and hopefully end
this marginal thread, the important difference between the "warnings" from
EFF and CERT [the old one, not the recent one about the security tester]
is INTENT.  CERT is not Officer Friendly.  They can sometimes be OK, but
the message in question was rather big brotherish.  Does anyone here
really WANT to have CERT telling you what they think you should do?  I don't.
The EFF on the other hand posted this material specifically to help people
AVOID being trapped in a situation that may result in prison terms.  The
other side of the fence entirely.  As I've explained to Lance in email,
it's like the difference between a cop saying "I don't think you should be
drinking", and a person warning their friend drinking in the park,"Better
ditch that beer, here come the cops."

That, and I really don't think that the TONE of "voice" of the messages in
question have anything whatsoever to do with their content. 

At any rate, I'd really like to just table this matter, it is getting
further and further afield.

-- 
Stanton McCandlish     Electronic Frontier Foundation Online Activist & SysOp
"A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood of
ideas in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -JFK
-=> mech@eff.org   NitV-DC  202-232-2715, Fido 1:109/? IndraNet 369:111/1