Well said ... and I would imagine that May and Co. have very logical, reasonable and laudible goals. The problem here, is that the moderates on the list does not want to be defined by the extremes. (I am quite certain there will be some flaming to follow, as the indignations let loose.) The one question I would ask those who spout "XXX needs killing" is whether you really want to make a difference or just stand up for an isolated principle? You just might be right, but maybe no one noticed, and the ignorant masses (a.k.a. sheeples) just walked right over you (and your rights) anyway. Even in your world, it is not acceptable to point a gun at someone and demand that they act with reason or even enlightened self interest. Ernest (dusting off my flame proof vest) Hua -----Original Message----- From: Aimee Farr [mailto:aimee.farr@pobox.com] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 6:26 PM To: citizenQ Cc: cypherpunks@lne.com Subject: A Brevital Moment (was..Ignore Aimee Farr) Mr. Ziplip wrote:
Tim -
Behavioral psychologists will tell you that the best way to extinguish an undesirable behavior is to IGNORE it.
If Farr's posturings and baitings are truly to be made ineffective, the best course of action amongst the cpunks who care is to killfile the postings and refuse to engage on ANY level.
My post was not "bait." The reason we have anything left of the amendments so frequently talked about in here is due to the independence of the judiciary. While you can question aforesaid independence, threatening the judiciary is beyond the pale. There are some posts in here that give me 'pause for psycholinguistic analysis.' As such, I worry that they could be misconstrued (Type 5...Type 6, compulsive or possible syndicate bombers even...) by some hypersensitive, uneducated people not intimately familiar with the history and quirks of this list -- in what has become a hypersensitive environment. Bell's "Assassination Politics" put cypherpunks on some protective intelligence agendas. It would not be implausible to assume you were being monitored to see if you "run" with the seeded assassination memes, if only for analytical purposes. These matters are taken seriously by those charged with the care of protected persons. (Contrary to what some here would have you believe, subtlety can get you a much higher threat-rating than overtly threatening correspondence.)
Rising to the bait, debating whether such-and-such a purpose is behind Farr's postings, speculating on Farr's true intent, all this does is spur on the postings, the baiting, the provocation. Just say "no" to responding to ANY of Farr's postings, and I would almost put money that the behavior will extinguish within a week.
Baiting? Provocation? No, a caveat. Do not tolerate behavior of that nature. It subjects you all to scrutiny and mischaracterization. What about Mr. K-S that hides behind his hushmail jacket and asks for names and addresses.....why doesn't somebody cuss him out? ~Aimee