Forwarded message:
From: Tim May <tcmay@got.net> Subject: Re: The Interlinked Cypherpunks Lists? (fwd)
I wasn't advocating either:
a) any "forcing" of anything
b) any compliance with scripts, cooperation, etc.
Instead, imagine this "service":
- a distribution point (= list) which subscribes to all of the various lists (cyberpass, algebra, ssz, etc.)
- it sends out to subscribers the first instance of any message it receives
- duplicates (see discussion below) would not be sent
- it would, ideally, be on a robust machine
Exactly, pity that isn't what you stated in the first place.
This again is anti-cpunks, it forces a level of cooperation and information sharing that is in direct opposition to beliefs in anonymity and privacy. I don't want it known who is subscribed to lists through SSZ, in short: It isn't any of your damn business and quit asking.
No one has ever said you, or SSZ, or anyone, has to participate.
Sorta defeats the whole concept of 'inter-linked lists' doesn't it? The point was to make it easy for ANYONE who wanted to participate. If you exclude parties because they won't do it 'your' way what is the difference? Nada, null, nill, zero, nothing. I can see it now; "oh, if you want to be a member you have to run this set of scripts that automaticaly subscribes you to the other lists and you can expect repeated querries of your subscription database. Oh, by the way you are also agreeing to have other lists subscribe and unsubscribe their user lists to your site at their operators whim. Oh yeah, and if they get really clever they can have you shipping subscription lists of your membership all over the place as well." Sounds so much like the FBI going to the library for loan records and denial of service attack it isn't even funny. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage@ssz.com