This is an open letter to E. Hughes.
Let me review my arguments for starting the group immediately.
5. No one other than the poster takes heat. The poster should not post if they are concerned about the risk.
I'm curious as to what good this will be then.
Look, apparently you haven't got any heat on the Mycotronx postings, but wouldn't you feel a hell of a lot more comfortable if they *weren't* funneled through your single machine? Ask Steve Jackson what paranoid and degenerate agents can accomplish when they have an easily-identified, portable target and some vague suspicions! The 911 document has all the criminality of a wedding announcement compared to the Mycotronx stuff! Don't these postings demonstrate there is an *immediate* need?
The distributed nature of a usenet group would be nice....
have controversial postings to the group, starting out. Currently, though, I just think there is just no momentum without a group. Which comes first, the anonymous servers or the group? Obviously, the *group*!
Without controversial postings, no one will read the group. What is the point, then?
Here's my idea. For *now*, lets just use alt.whistleblower as a *clearinghouse* of material that was *already posted* elsewhere on the net. That is, nobody takes any personal risk. They just keep their eyes out for stuff that appears in other places that fits into the `whistleblowing' category and forwards it to that group. If there is any heat they just point to the original posting and say `I did nothing but forward it, don't talk to me about it.' (By the way, the Mycotronx posting is awesome whistleblower stuff, the kind that legends are made of, but I think it still might be a bit risky to post that to a Usenet group yet, even an `alt', even anonymously). Also, we can just forward interesting stuff from newspapers and magazines. No risk there. If anybody thinks they have a solid way to remain anonymous (we're talking about cypherpunks here, I'm sure they'll find a way) they can post *now* using old-fashioned methods.
Some time ago, I joined the bandwagon in opposing this "hasty" decision to form the WB group. But, I like this idea. My reason for opposing it the first time was that people's lives/jobs could be at stake. This might be a germination point for the full-blown WB group, but without the risks to it's contributers. I like this idea.
What more can I say? Isn't the immediate need transparently clear? Does *anyone* read what I write? Am I nothing but a babbling, deranged lunatic? Just *watch* how fast I get a FAQ there, if it *ever* starts...
I'm reading it. And (for once?) I agree on this subject.
There are now several hundred quasi-official cypherpunks, and I think a lot of them are agitated and itching for something to do! Not to
I know the feeling..... ;^) +-----------------------+-----------------------------+---------+ | J. Michael Diehl ;-) | I thought I was wrong once. | PGP KEY | | mdiehl@triton.unm.edu | But, I was mistaken. |available| | mike.diehl@fido.org | | Ask Me! | | (505) 299-2282 +-----------------------------+---------+ | | +------"I'm just looking for the opportunity to be -------------+ | Politically Incorrect!" <Me> | +-----If codes are outlawed, only criminals wil have codes.-----+ +----Is Big Brother in your phone? If you don't know, ask me---+