Re: FW: Dr. Vulis is not on cypherpunks any more [RANT]

[Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>]

Greg Broiles wrote:
> At 03:08 PM 11/3/96 -0800, blanc <blancw@cnw.com> wrote:
> >Vulis did everything to set himself up for what he got, did he not.

Am I missing something, or do some people just not get it?

Nobody cares about the "Doctor" other than his personal friends, which cypherpunks as
a list is not.

What *does* matter is what this issue did to everyone else.

Remember the old adage, regurgitated frequently by USA Today, L.A. Times, etc.?
"x number of people are willing to give up some of their freedoms to stop crime" ad
nauseam, even though it says further on in the paragraph that "it probably won't do
any good anyway".  Yes, they actually print that crap.

So now cypherpunks is in the same boat.  Enacting censorship that doesn't accomplish
the stated purpose.  So if it doesn't accomplish the stated purpose, and Doctor Vulis
can post anyway, what was the *real* reason, or to look at it another way, what's the
next thing to be enacted to further tighten the screws on the "Doctor", and add more
limits to freedom?