[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Censorship on cypherpunks?, from The Netly News
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> Yes, I understand this. It's quite obvious; being removed from the
> subscriber list hasn't slowed Vulis at all. When I was writing the piece
> Vulis seemed to have slowed his ad hominem attacks and instead was talking
> about censorship (something that is within the charter of the list), but
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Actually, Declan, it's not. "info cypherpunks" in the body of a message to
[email protected] yields the welcome message to the list -- the closest
thing to a charter available. The subjects of censorship and free speech
are neither mentioned nor alluded to anywhere within that document.
The subjects of censorship & free speech do bear some relationship to the
list's expressed subject and are certainly near and dear to most cypherpunk
hearts. The government cannot prevent us from discussing the implications
of privacy enabled by strong crypto.
Free speech & censorship may even be interesting, entertaining, & important
topics -- hence their consistent recurrance in discussions. But the above
assertion is factually wrong.
_______________________________________________________________
Omegaman <mailto:[email protected]>
PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2
59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63
Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:"
field to get a copy of my public key
_______________________________________________________________