Lobbying/Politics/etc.

["Jim Sewell" <jims@Central.KeyWest.MPGN.COM>]

<In mail Timothy C. May said:>
> 
> Just don't call your campaign "Cypherpunks," as you don't speak for
> me.

  The US Government doesn't speak for me on the "Bosnia thing", but
  they say "America's stance is".  I am a member of America, just as
  we are members of cypherpunks.  You didn't vote for a "lobbyist"
  to represent you, but then again, I didn't vote for Bill Clinton to
  represent me. (Yes, I did vote against him).

> I'm not trying to sound snippy and testy here. If you and the others
> who are advocating an aggressive media and public education campaign
> can raise the money, get the stuff produced, and so forth, then more
> power to you.

   Ditto regarding this reply.  No ill intentions, just expressing
   another point of view.

> But it ain't a Cypherpunks thing. So don't call it that. Cypherpunks
> write code, as Eric Hughes says. Or as Phil Karn has expanded on
> wonderfully: "Don't get mad, get even--write code."

	How did Eric Hughes and Phil Karn get to speak the immortal words
	that DO represent the entire group?  Even if they run machines
	that run the mail list, it doesn't make them Cypherpunk Spokespeople,
	only the guy with a spare computer.  [No offense meant to those who
	work hard to give us what we have.  Your efforts ARE appreciated.]

[Some very good comments about why infomercials won't work deleted...]

> e. finally, it *still* wouldn't be a Cypherpunks thing....we have no
> voting system, no rulers, no bylaws, no nothing.

	The term Cypherpunks is amorphous, thus subject to use and abuse
	by the masses.  When people like Jeff Davis and Phill Zimmermann
	say "The cypherpunks are generally opposed to Clipper" it makes us
	an "organization" which, like it or not, does have representatives
	and agendas.  Unfortunately, perception defines reality.  If we
	had a "What Cypherpunks Are" document people would realize that
	whatever is said of the group is a generalization.

> A better use of some raised cash--which you are berating us for not
> raising--would be to finance Phil Zimmermann's "Pretty Good Voice
> Privacy," or the similar efforts of others (described here in several
> recent posts).

	Agreed.  Money can be better used elsewhere, IMO, but if folks
	do end up in the public eye it would be nice to have some
	concrete definitions the public can use to judge the comments
	made by those high-visibility people.

    Take care,
	   Jim
-- 
 Tantalus Inc.          Jim Sewell      Amateur Radio: KD4CKQ
 P.O. Box 2310          Programmer           Internet: jims@mpgn.com
 Key West, FL 33045     C-Unix-PC          Compu$erve: 71061,1027
 (305)293-8100                            PGP via email on request. 
 1K-bit Fingerprint: 8E 14 68 90 37 87 EF B3  C4 CF CD 9A 3E F9 4A 73