[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bit quiet in here lately
- To: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: bit quiet in here lately
- From: [email protected]
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 04:34:26 -0800
- Comments: This message is NOT from the person listed in the Fromline. It is from an automated software remailing service operating atthat address.THE PORTAL SYSTEM DOES NOT CONDONE OR APPROVE OF THE CONTENTS OF THISPOSTING. Please report problem mail to <[email protected]>.
- Sender: [email protected]
On Fri, 24 Nov 1995, David K. Merriman wrote:
> At 02:11 AM 11/24/95 -0500, futplex wrote:
> >sameer writes:
> >> I am working on a spec which myself and others will turn into
> >> an internet draft, for placements on the standards track. It will
> >> standardize remailer commands and nymserver commands, and will
> >> incorporate payment. Once we get a draft written up it will be posted
> >> for review, flames, and criticism.
[snip to save bandwidth]
> Now, if the remailer service-listing operators could agree on a standard
> format for their reporting (lag time, feature lists, etc), then it would
> simplify maintaining a list of remailers - which would increase the
> usability of the remailer system, and help the use and growth of remailers.
The remailer operators can't even agree on a standard header syntax. Some
support one header to request remailing, while others support another.
I remember some time ago, that I was using a non-compliant (i.e. unique)
remailer located in Berkeley. I was trying to post some information that
would have helped to expedite the FDA approved study on medicinal
The article detailed that Health & Welfare Canada was growing a bumper
high-potency crop to help teach the Edmonton city police about the wicked
weed. Especially, cultivation techniques.
I thought that this might be "helpful" to the medicinal marijuana study.
I thought that since the Canadian Government was granting licenses to
help law enforcement, that they might not be opposed to studying its
possible health benefits as well.
(Canada's government funded health care system, could use some cost saving
measures. If there is something useful there, it could help redirect
funding, and indirectly ameliorate the current waiting lists and service
cuts for all Canadians.)
I thought that the study organizers in the United States, MAPS I believe
-- the ones who had complied with all US laws and regulations and permits
and headed up by a guy named, Rick Doblin, a fellow who's apparently
writing a thesis on Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at
Harvard -- I thought that the study organizers might be able to get what
they needed from the Canadian FDA equivalent, Health & Welfare, Canada.
(Disclaimer: Unofficially, of course, not speaking for Health & Welfare
Canada. I have absolutely no connection with anyone, anywhere or
anything at all in any possible form whatsoever. In fact this post may
well be the product of random typing by a simian life form.)
The damn post never was posted. It was either editted out of the data
stream, or something else nefarious occurred.
I mailed the remailer-operator about this, and asked: "What's the problem?"
And the remailer operator didn't reply to the message.
Now, no-one in Berkeley, not a cypherpunk of all people, could be opposed
to seeing marijuana legalized, now could they?? I mean not, California,
Maybe, I just couldn't figure out how to post, and how to use a
remailer. I don't know. Or maybe I had one too many beers and should've
stuck to having soda's.
Alice de 'nonymous ...
...just another one of those...
P.S. This post is in the public domain.
C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.
P.P.S. (Come on down for a briefing to msri ... ya ... right ...
"persuasion" just isn't all that appetizing, Joe ... ;)