Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
what TCM continues to stick his head in the sand over is the fact that the list noise levels have gotten outlandishly out of control over recent times, far beyond anything in memory. what is it due to?
"Out of control" says it all, don't you think? (as in "control freaks", that is).
it appears that there is a basic law of cyberspace that S/N decreases as you add more people. it seems to be a very obvious and repeatable property.
No, it decreases rapidly when your forum more-or-less suddenly becomes a hot item on the web. If it weren't hot, nobody would bother, believe me.
there are some significant lessons about cryptoanarchy that are completely evading TCM. how well does anarchy scale? apparently, not well. TCM would like to pretend that just deleting posts and having outsider filterers is a "solution" to the problem and argues for business as usual, upholding the status quo.
"Scale" is a term used by controllers.
the problem is that when you have a deteriorating situation, the status quo is not a valid concept. keeping the status quo means further deterioration.
Look at the big picture. Some people have proposed unacceptable methods for controlling human population, and it should be no surprise that the same mentality would pervade these forums.
TCM also fails to address the problem of AGENT PROVOCATEURS. the cyberspace list is intensely fragile and susceptible/ vulnerable to them as Vulis demonstrates. it only takes ONE and a lot of tentacles. does TCM propose a solution to this? no, of course not, because he has a blind spot when it comes to realizing the PATENTLY OBVIOUS FLAWS OF CRYPTOANARCHY that stare him in the face.
Unless, of course, the forum itself (and its proponents) are themselves the "agent provocateurs".
if cpunks had a formal way of making decisions, and some loyalty to each other, instead of BAILING OUT at the slightest difficulty, perhaps the situation would be different, eh? see how quickly people who were once friends simply WALK OUT on each other in the cryptoanarchist approach? where is the loyalty? the sense of working for the greater good? it's gone. TCM simply ABANDONS the list at the first opportunity, and ignores the years of hard work that J.G. has put into it.
Loyalty? Amongst anarchists? Two points: Loyalty on c-punks was almost entirely a negative factor (i.e., sucking up to Gilmore). Two, Tim May is for Tim May (as he should be), and he didn't abandon his ideals one bit, which is a helluva lot more to say for him than Gilmore or Sandfort.
timmy, cpunks, etc. you are getting a lesson in REALITY. you are seeing the logical conclusion of your views playing out before you. acrimony, bitterness, resignation, chaos, confusion, cacaphony, anarchy.
Perhaps you should turn your talents to writing country songs.