Re: Recommendation: Creation of "alt.cypherpunks"

[paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk]

> > It is too late to stop alt.cypherpunks, but if I had to make a
> > prediction again, I would predict that soon posters will BEG to help
> > them create comp.*.cypherpunks, because of spam and alt.flamage.
> 
> Timmy has a valid point: the reason why a comp.* newsgroup might have less
> cross-posted and "off-topic" crap is because net.cops would be more
> likely to complain to posters' sysadmins. Having a charter state that
> cypherpunks have technical means to ignore traffic they don't like,
> and don't need anyone forging cancels or complaining to sysadmins
> or otherwise getting silenced, is a good idea.

I don`t believe for one moment that, however well intentioned such a 
move would be, it would work. The most notorious net.cops who 
thoroughly deserve the (spit) after their name would take little 
notice of such a charter and take it upon themselved to "act in the 
best interests of the usenet community"

I think the only real soluion is to see alt.cypherpunks, or indeed 
any usenet group along those lines, as I see it: Something to fill a 
gap while we get a solid and reliable mailing list format working 
again. There are too many problems with the usenet approach and if 
certain list members have great leanings towards the usenet angle we 
can gate it just as mail.cypherpunks is a gated group now.

Any more news on the majordomo network Igor?




> 
> What's going to happen when (not if) someone posts something in
> alt.cypherpunks that Chris Lewis (spit) judges to be "spam"
> and forges a cancel? Or someone posts a binary and Richard
> "little dick" Depew forges a cancel?
> 
> > > 3. An unmoderated Usenet newsgroup would have even ore crap than this maili
> > > list. I've been thinking of how to deal with crap, and with the obvious des
> > > by some people to delegate their decision what to read and what not to read
> > > to other people.
> >
> > It is alt.* and soc.* that has most crap, sci and comp are way better.
> 
> There's a bunch of net.cops in e.g. comp.lang.eiffel that complain to
> sysadmins of anyone posting to that newsgroup who's in a member of the
> "in" crowd". It may or may not cut down on the crap, but is it worth it?
> 
> > > Most people don't have nocem-enabled newareaders yet... Which is where the
> > > network of cypherpunks majordomos Igor's been busy creating comes in very
> > > handy.
> > >
> >
> > It is a very good idea to let NoCeM issuers and filterers work
> > independently from list nodes.
> 
> 
> Yes - from the legal liability point of view (since it bothers the lying
> cocksucker Gilmore (spit, fart, belch) so  much): suppose someone
> anonymously posts  skipjack source code to alt.cypherpunks. Under the
> present systen, say, the arachelian asshole might decide not to forward
> it to his mailing list feaing the NSA. NoCeM's can separate the function
> of highlighting interesting articles from the function of forwarding
> these articles to subscribers who only want to see the highlighted
> articles.
> 
> ---
> 
> <a href="mailto:dlv@bwalk.dm.com">Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM</a>
> Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
> 

  Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"