Bill Campbell wrote:
While many of you think that the ability of a list to withstand constant spamming is an important issue; the government is busily working to outlaw encryption and privacy, and I fear that much is lost by the side issue of the "how easily can I kill a list".
The "About Cypherpunks" intro to the list states, "Cypherpunks know how to attack a system and how to defend it." "Cypherpunks love to practice." If I choose to join the "Venemous Snakes" list, I'm not going to complain about getting bit every now and again.
I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced.
Dr. Vulis? There was an 'attempt' to silence him, but it hasn't worked, to date.
I cannot understand why you think that the attempt to disrupt and destroy this list a necessary step in the task of resisting this governmental effort.
I haven't seen any evidence of an attempt to destroy this list. I've seen many attempts to manipulate the list's direction, but that is another matter.
Again, I can't understand why "killing the messenger" is advancing the issues of privacy and crypto issues.
There was a crypto-messenger named DataETRetch that 'advanced' their version of crypto on this list, and they left their heads on the chopping block on their way out. If your team can't even make it through the scrimmages, then they don't belong in the game. And if you find yourself suggesting, "Why don't we just play 'touch', instead of 'tackle'.", then you're probably getting too old and tired to play in the major leagues.
How does the posting of numerous crude anti-Tim May messages promote personal privacy?
It doesn't. 'Stopping' the annoyance of these messages promotes personal privacy.
"In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche "In times of war, a peacelike man sets upon others." Bubba Rom Dos
This seems horribly to describe the current situation.
No shit, Sherlock. Toto