Re: another anonymous poster helping to destroy our rights

["Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>]

>
>As Tim May has explained over and over again, "the cypherpunks" do not
>exist.  Cypherpunks is a mailing list, not a society or club.
>"The cypherpunks" as a group can do nothing about what gets posted to
>this list except comment on it.

there are various myths here that ought to be addressed. 

- if the cypherpunks are not really a group, then people wouldn't get
upset what goes under the cypherpunk name. but in fact people flame
hotly what others think is or is not a "legitimate" cypherpunk tactic
or project or whatever.

you can't have it both ways. either anyone is free to decide what a 
cypherpunk is, and no one has the right to argue with it. or, cypherpunks
are something in particular, and someone has the authority to  determine
that.

so far the "authorities" are those who have been on a the list a long time.
(it is still an informal system however).  this is a reasonable system. 
but I object to the way that people such 
as PM argue in one message that "there is no such thing as the cypherpunks"
but then endlessly determine themselves what is appropriate for the list.
doesn't anyone see the inconsistency-at-best-and-hypocrisy-at-worst of this?

- its simply not true that no one can do anything about what is posted here.
there are different ways of running a mailing list. here are some things
that would be different than what is going on right now. I'm not saying
they are better, but just remember there are alternatives:

= moderator keeps a higher profile, posts under his own name, keeps order,
determines apropriateness
= no one argues with moderator or each other about valid topics
= list can bar people who are not subscribed from posting. this would
in fact  bar "hit and run" anonymous messages. however obviously the 
current list adminstration favors them.
= the list charter can ask for people to submit to various practices on
the honor system, such as not using pseudonyms. cryptoanarchists who
hate the idea of trust are of course going to object to the honor system,
because "that which cannot be enforced should not be prohibited".

>Finally, it should be noted that the kind of messages you're posting
>lately are eerily reminiscent of Detweiler's mental deterioration just
>before he went off the deep end.  In fact, the line "How long will the
>cypherpunks put up with this?" may be an exact quote.

perhaps Detweiler is in fact really a pseudonym of Cohen. or maybe 
Cohen and Detweiler and all other anonymous posts are really a big
joke being played on everyone by TCM. although you may have an interesting
point there. perhaps thinking about trying to impose order on cryptoanarchists
(who themselves occasionally rant about the disorder amongst themselves, 
although never in those terms) is a sure recipe for frustration insanity. 

caveat emptor!!

(the list, as it is currently set up, is highly vulnerable to agents 
provacateur.  crpytoanarchists should realize that the same "disorders"
 (oh, sorry, "freedoms") such as completely unrestrained anonymous posting,
 no "official" moderation etc.  they favor can be used very 
effectively against them when an intelligent an 
mischievous adversary so chooses or is provoked to do so. there 
have been visceral demonstrations of this on occasion here <g>)