At 11:37 AM 04/14/94 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
Jamie Lawrence wrote:
The list is what people make of it. Nothing more and nothing less. If you have held off on writing 'til now about topics that are of great interest to you, then why are you surprised that the topics others write about don't match your interests?
First off, don't dismiss me as a whiner. I personally could care less about your personal politics until they overlap with crypto. But you misread my post consistently. Perhaps I did poorly at expressing myself. I haven't been writing due to time constraints. It is not *my* political interests being underrepresented here that I was rambling about. It was the potential loss of other people. Extreme example- If you started to read a book called _Crypto for the Masses_ by someone who rambled on for 400 pages about socialism, and then got to the point and made really valid, cutting observations about the state of crypto, what are the odds you'd read to that section?
Nobody's asking you to be "associated with libertarianism," for example. That many of us are libertarian-oriented is hardly surprising, this being the Net. And the nonlibertarians are welcome, but they seldom make persuasive arguments contradiciting the lib. views, in my opinion. Certain non-lib (though *I* call him libertarian!) folks like Dave Mandl are very welcome here, and make their views known.
What I was trying to say was not that I feel torn between being on this list and my own views, but that disregarding what anyone here may or may not believe in, first impressions are gonna chase a lot of people away who otherwise could be sympathetic to many beliefs that seem to be held as important.
The point is that even if you think anyone with a viewpoint opposing yours is automatically stupid and not worth your time (and I don't think that too many of you are that bad off ;), aren't they at least worth using to further something you believe strongly in? It might do well to be careful in alienating potential allys by flip political jokes and comments.
I don't know if this is a jab at me or not, perhaps for my sin of poking fun at Ross Perot.....I felt a satirical, but probably close to the truth, point about Perot's authoritarian streak would make my point better than a simple statement of my views.
I wasn't replying to you so much as using this thread as a jump point for (!!) a new topic, specifically that of perceptions of others Re: this list. No, it wasn't a jab at you (I think Perot is scary as well)- sorry if my comments lent themselves to this interpretation. I do think, however, it would be valid to say that a Perot supporter should be considered a potential ally- as much as a libertarian or even a Clinton supporter.
If you want your brand of politics discussed here, as it relates to cryptography, privacy, Clipper, etc., then *discuss* it. You can't blame others for making their own comments.
That was not my point. I do not blame others for anything. The goal was to inform others of the perceptions of a relative newcomer to the list who differs significantly in opinion on numerous points in relation to a attracting newcomers to the wonderful world of crypto. If I thought this list didn't interest me, I wouldn't be on it.
--Tim May
-j