No Subject

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

>
>Cypherpunks does not seem to me to be anything like the well-
>regulated lists you ascribe to Prof Volokh.
>

Declan should rest his point here. the cpunk listis notorious
for being way astray. yet cpunks continuously argue against
anyone with a moderator type role. could there be some correlation
between lack of moderation/leadership on the list and the 
piles of noise that people incessantly complain about? of 
course I'm insane for suggesting this.

I've repeatedly advocated
the usefulness of a good moderator. cpunks believe that such
a role is anti-anarchic (which it is), and therefore bogus.
the root of this is deeper, it relates to the psychology of
EH, TCM, JG who all have very love-hate relationships
with leadership.

this list suffers neglect by its creators 
unlike any other mailing list I know of in cyberspace, and
they are proud of that neglect, instead they call it "anarchy"
and claim it is a major blessing.

I think many people need to learn a lesson that cyberspace
doesn't change certain basic realities, such as how important
a dynamic leader is in forward motion in any area. but they
will have plenty of opportunities to learn over the next
few years and decades. and I'll be snickering in the sidelines
as long as they wonder aloud why their realities are as
they are and they find the deficiencies therein inscrutable.