This brings up the question, In the event _the net_ were centralized, and not a disperate entity, how might selective distrubution be affected? -> I would reccommend that if certain sites become a problem by attracting flamers, communists, liberals, or government authoritarian types, that we could remove them on a case-by-case basis. <- In the event this became a problem, how might a theoretically "private" or "psuedo-private" (constructively private?) newsletter/mailing list be restricted. Even today, what recourse do we have to keep the circulation of the list minimal, and (egads) filter the readers such to keep bandwidth low and flame / agitator disruption to a min.? Doesn't this smack of censorship, and if so where's the line between censorship and exclusivity, and is cypherpunks even really exclusive? It was nice before the summer when the list was a little less well known and it had that "private feel" that I think T. May was talking about. Is there a basic conflict between impact power of the list as a political sway force and that personal feel?