jury spam justifiable?

[Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>]

At 12:35 AM 12/26/98 -0000, HyperReal-Anon wrote:
>And while we're being hypocritical and stealing (oh, it's okay because it's
>for "education"), maybe we ought to educate about why spam is bad, and how
>crypto may help end spam.

Its not stealing because only the Govt can identify crimes.  And they
haven't.

Legal Junk mail doesn't steal time?  Legal Solicitors' phone calls don't
steal?  Taxes don't steal?  Courtroom injustice isn't a theft of rights?

>Right. About the only thing you people are going to accomplish is to
>alienate anybody who might care what you have to say. 

The message must be phrased correctly.

>While you're spamming,
>maybe you can even make the Cypherpunks look really bad. 

Who mentioned any mailing list?  This would be a private matter.

>After all, the ends always justify the means. When the USG wants to storm
>your home with a squad of ninjas, that's okay, so long as they're checking
>for drugs or other evil things. Since it will keep us all safe, let's
>eliminate privacy rights.

Alls fair in love and war.

>The idea of spamming for "educational purposes" is the most obscene and

The sheeple who haven't figured out how to filter spam are the ones
most in need of education.  Do it for the children.  For the future
generations.

The only thing evil needs to succeed is for good to do nothing.

Or just carry on with the same old same old, if that's what makes you feel
better.  Best not to make waves, after all.  Might scare the horses.