"tentacles"-- I don't get it!!

[nobody@cicada.berkeley.edu]

I hate to intrude here but I have been seeing all the smoke out in
the newsgroups about this "tentacle" business and L. Detweiler (who
is this guy??!). I hope I won't be flamed so I am sending this
through a remailer. (I love your technology, one of my friends
went to a cypherpunk meeting once and told me about the cooler
stuff.) I sent L. Detweiler some of these questions but he 
never responded, so I was hoping people here could help me
understand what is going on out here!!!

So anyway...

Could someone define "tentacle"?

Detweiler said, out in the newsgroups:

> 
> 1) the cypherpunks betrayed me. they even got a an old college friend
> to pretend he was real. M.Dale sent me mail claiming he was real. I
> did not ask for this mail. But if you send me lies, I will call you a 
> liar.

I don't agree with that in the least. (With what he says they did, not
the paragraph itself).

> 
> 2) Szabo is one of the most valuable cypherpunk tentacles as far as
> reputation. `he' has been posting to the net for a long time in
> many groups. this is why they fought so tenaciously to protect him.
> 
> 3) T.C.May said at a cypherpunk meeting that everyone I have accused of
> being a tentacle is real. T.C.May is a liar. I dare you, Mr. May,
> to come out of your hole. I will tear your postings to shreds. I
> will rip the lies apart. I will decapitate the tentacles, and they
> will be afraid to show their sickly green faces anywhere respectable.
> 

I have followed this thread for such a short time (relativly speaking).
I think I picked up on the "Cryptoanarchist" part (someone who doesn't
support the regulation of cryptography?). From what I've been able to
gather, the talk is about "tentacles" coming from one "Medusa." 

> 4) B.Stewart says that he saw N.Szabo and J.Dinkelacker at the 
> last cypherpunk meeting, *and* their drivers license. B.Stewart is
> an Accomplice. I challenge anyone who saw them to tell the world
> you did. Did you really see the Phantoms?
> 
> 5) the whole affair proves that the conspiracy is very active,
> involves very many people, and has gotten quite out of control.
> 
> 6) anyone who supports the cypherpunks or their leaders are 
> accomplices to lies and the `hidden agenda' of black marketeering,
> manipulation, tax evasion, deception, money laundering, overthrow
> of governments. And these are just the *obvious* ones.

So many makeshift terms here that I'm not familiar with. Could 
someone Define "cypherpunk." (I HAVE heard of "CyberPunk," but 
couldn't extract a meaning out of that either.) Please enlighten me.

> 
> 7) cypherpunks are responsible for a huge increase in trash lately
> to newsgroups. It is a means of drowning my signal in noise. They
> are nothing but conspiracists, powermongers, and extremists.
> 

What trash is this? The only thing I have seen (so far, as I believe)
are various messages written by an12070 (L. Detweiler?) that have erupted into
flame wars. 

Keep in mind that I'm NOT FLAMING ANYONE here.

> hey cypherpunks! you think that because no one challenges your 
> ridiculous posts, calling me insane, that no one believes me? that
> no one is taking me seriously? That no one is stunned that szabo
> is nothing but a worthless, slimy snake? the joke's on you. there
> are a fantastic number of lurkers `out there' who are beginning to
> sense the lies.
> 

CyberAnarchists... Is that someone who doesn't want CyberSpace
regulated? Personally, I have nothing against the free exchange of
information (does anyone here?).

I was really upset when he said

> death to cyberanarchists-- by anarchy...
>
> 
> stay tuned, soon they will all be SQUISHed
> 
> -- 

is this one of the "violent death threats" that everyone has been
talking about?

thanks for the help, I just want to know. sorry that I missed 
some of the earlier stuff. I will be watching this list for
a reply.

BTW that stuff that Detweiler is doing with signatures, switching
them around, it is kind of ironic given that the cypherpunks are
really into that thing. He seems to be really pissing you guys off.
but I gotta admit it really is a sort of new art form in cyberspace,
kinda like Graffiti. although, there is so much activity lately 
that it kind of makes me wonder if there is a whole team of people
out there. there have been a lot of rumors about infiltrators and
double agents. we'll see what the future brings. 

personally I think remailers are God's Gift to Cyberspace, and 
anything done to limit their capabilities or infringe on the 
privacy of whoever uses them is CENSORSHIP and ORWELLIAN POLICE 
STATE. we'll prove to Detweiler that we are not the hypocrites
he claims we are, that under no circumstances whatsoever will
we *ever* betray the people who use our remailers, even if they
are our enemies, because Privacy is all that matters.

                       .adAMMMb.   .dAMMMAbn.
                   .adAWWWWWWWWWAuAWWWWWWWWWWAbn.
                .adWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWbn.
            ..adMMMMMP^~".--"~^YWWWWWWWWWWHHMMMMMMMMbn..
                "~^Y"   /    ..dMWMP".ammmmdMMMUP^~"
                   |   Y    dMAbammdAMMMMMMP^~"
                   |   |    MMMMMMMMMMMMU^"    -Row
                   l   :    Y^YUWWWWUP^"
                    \       j
                     "-..,.^

 mveaudry@turing.acs.ryerson.ca & ld231782@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU
         (and how many more that I haven't revealed yet? Could
           I actually be jmurphy@apple.com? could I be 3CJS5@qucdn.
           QueensU.ca? Who am I? Who cares?)