Re: Fuck You Dumb Cunt

[Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>]

On Sun, 17 Nov 1996, aga wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Nov 1996, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
> 
> > Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 08:37:14 -0800 (PST)
> > From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
> > To: aga <aga@dhp.com>
> > Cc: Cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
> > Subject: Re: Does John Gilmore...
> > 
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >                           SANDY SANDFORT
> >  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> > 
> > C'punks,
> > 
> > On Sat, 16 Nov 1996, aga wrote:
> > 
> > > The cyberpunks mailing list is PUBLIC property and should NOT
> > > be controlled by John Gilmore!  This just goes to show the real
> > > facist censorship motives that the EFF has behind it.
> > 
> > I have a suggestion for "Aga" and others who believe this sort of
> > nonsense.  Please do us all a favor and try to sue John.  I'm sure 
> > that among all jack-leg and wannabe lawyers on this list that they
> > can come up with a viable cause of action.  And John has deep 
> > pockets; you could (literally) make out like bandits AND rescue 
> > "freedom of speech" on privately maintained mailing lists.  You 
> > could be heroes (or look ten times as foolish as you already do).
> > 
> > 
> >  S a n d y
> > 
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 
> 
> fuck you dumb cunt.  I told you to leave that list off of your
> fucking headers -- you just do not listen, do you?

So this great defender of free speech seeks to silence it?  Why not just 
let listmembers use filters?  Those who disapprove of John 
Gilmore's action argue that he should have done that, although you seem 
to believe that the argument doesn't apply when someone fouls your nest. 
John's action wasjustified in my view, although I believe courtesy 
should have caused him to notify Vulis that he was out ... and for all 
the heat he has taken, John should've prevented him from posting to the list.

Regardless of what good he may have done in the past, Vulis was (and is) 
engaged in an enormously egotistical disply of bad manners and off-topic 
posting.  Having just installed Eudora Pro 3.0, I know that I can easily 
filter him out, but have hesitated to use filters in the past.  Vulis may 
be the one to push me over the edge.

I'm especially sorry that some of you don't believe in property rights.  
Some have argued that the list is now a public forum -- apparently 
primarily because a lot of people are listmembers.  This confiscation of 
private property would, I thought, be inimical to the cypherpunks general 
philosophy (to the extent one exists).  I'm sure Louis Freeh will be 
pleased to know that you believe in such confiscation.  With email 
being used by so many people and because it traverses some publicly owned 
sites, you certainly cannot argue that it is not a public forum -- if 
cypherpunks is.  So GAK should be OK, because it is simply an attempt to 
broaden the audience for speech, right?  And, in any event, the 
government could choose to ignore property rights and confiscate the 
speech, as you seek to do with John's privately owned list.

Just because you don't get your way, doesn't mean that what happened was 
illegal or even wrong.  Your authoritarian views would do Stalin proud.

EBD
 
> Anybody that supports John Gilmore is an asshole bitch or cocksucker
> one of the two.

Beautiful use of language.

> 
> out.
> 
> -a
> 
>