Re: The thread that would not die. (Mandating signatures)

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>]

owner-cypherpunks@hks.net says:
> Perry E. Metzger <perry@imsi.com> wrote:
> >
> >John Schofield says:
> >>     It is silly to talk of someone "owning" the list.  The list
> >> is a community.  The only possible owners are the people in the
> >> community.  If we all left, Eric would still have control over
> >> the list--but the list would be worthless.
> >
> >It is silly to talk of someone "owning" a restaurant. The restaurant
> >is a community. The only possible owners are the people in the
> >community. If the patrons all left, Chef Joey would still have control
> >over the restaurant -- but the restaurant would be worthless.
> 
> You continue to confuse (deliberately?) a community with the place it meets.

You continue to confuse the way the mailing list functions with the
people that use it.

The question of whether Eric can require that all subscribers to the
list wear blue mud smeared over their faces at all times is what we
are discussing -- that is, does he have proprietary control over the
way the list is run. The list is run with resources he has been
granted dominion over. It appears that he's completely free to take
any action he likes. You are, of course, free to sugges that he not do
so, and you are also free to stop using his resources in disgust.

This has been driven into the ground, so I won't continue it. However,
I would suggest that all the people who think Eric doesn't have
absolute control here attempt to figure out how to impose any rule or
regulation without his consent, or how to stop him from implementing
anything without your consent.

(The fact that Eric has no interest in ruining the list and that we
would prefer that he not wreck it is immaterial, by the way -- he is
free to do so if he desires to, and that is what counts.)