Re: Depends / Re: Senate spams

[Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>]

Dale Thorn wrote:

[snip--left nut]
>  it would be nice
> to try to draw more of a connection between the ideas and ideals and
> the reality of the list, otherwise, we'll all wind up looking like
> hypocrites.  

  If I post missives misinterpreting your own words and intentions, then
you may no doubt be seen as a hypocrite to the gullible, or to those who
choose to limit their world view by reading my posts and killfiling
yours. In either case, I don't think this is a reason for you to lose
a lot of sleep.

> I personally don't see anything wrong with limiting
> postings to subscribers, as long as subscriptions are open to all.
> I also don't see anything wrong with warning a poster about commercial
> messages, or other technical problems such as attaching really huge
> files to go to the list, since all uncensored forums do this and
> everyone I know of agrees with it.

  To have this option seemed to me to be an area of common agreement 
among CypherPunks list subscribers at the time of the 'Laker's fans 
named Bubba' mailboming of the list via forged subscriptions to a 
sports forum.
  The attempts to label, as hypocrites, those who thereafter complained
about the fascist measures taken by self-appointed list saviors, are
nothing more than anal-retentive smoke blowing.

  I have an efficient ISP provider and can, for a reasonable price, not
worry about excessive download time, etc.
  The real-world reality is that there are those for whom paying to 
download the results of mailbomb attacks constitutes a denial of service
to them. There are undoubtedly also others whose financial and personal
time constraints may make a filtered version of the list attractive to
them, and thus lead to them retaining their interest in crypto issues,
instead of losing interest.
  I have not seen any of the anti-censorship elements in the CypherPunks
suggest that there should not be alternatives available for those whose
personal needs and/or interests are better served by various methods of
filtering. To attempt to force UCE/Spam on those ill-equipped to deal 
with it serves no purpose other than to lessen the number of people who
will have information in regard to the issues surrounding strong crypto.

> The "problem" here (if there is one) is determining SPAM and the like
> on a case-by-case basis.  Suggestions have been floated here, but as
> far as I know, none have been implemented.

  Igor has implemented spam-attack measures, and has been
straightforward
in both revealing these measures and asking for opinions in regard to
his actions and proposals.
  I do not anticipate Igor resorting to furtive methodologies in self-
servingly manipulating posts but, at the same time, I monitor what is
going on in the background of the various lists. I regard 'trust' as 
something that should be undertaken with one's eyes open, just the
same.

>  The real test, of course,
> is when deletions do occur, whether there are any complaints, and
> how those complaints are handled. 

  Thankfully, the CypherPunks list will likely never lack for paranoid
subscribers to raise warning flags whenever nefarious activities take
place in regard to the list (or when the computer 'burps', either).
  It is up to the individual subscriber to separate the realities from
the delusions. (I myself count on the space aliens to provide me with
advice and support from the messages I receive from them when the 
Scotch I drink shorts out the spaces between the mercury fillings in
my teeth. You may have a different method.)
-- 
Toto
-----------------------------
"The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre"
http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix/xenbody.html