At 09:29 AM 3/18/96 -0500, Mark Aldrich wrote:

I personally know Winn and several of the folks from NCSA. You're stuff would be a FANTASTIC contribution, and I'm certain that it would be a popular session. Yes, some of these folks are a bit "establishment," but they go to these things looking for new ideas, new perspectives, etc.

Well, I've forwarded the essay as is. If they really insist, I'd cut it down to a 1-2 page summary, but I suspect that if it catches their attention they won't mind reading the extra material.

You sound like a guy who can hold his own in a debate, so I imagine you'll have no problems dealing with this crowd. They may "challenge" your views, but you're not going to get attacked or anything.

You're probably right, but some of the more perceptive ones may shit bricks when they discover what the stakes really are. The REALLY perceptive ones will know that it doesn't make any difference, whether or not they like the idea or me, it's on the way.

Don't read too much into this. Last year, we had Eric Bloodaxe (Chris G) there, a host of, uh, shall we say "fringe" elements, and I think Eric Hughes was there (?Eric? Sarah and I *think* we saw you there?), as well. As far as an "agenda" other than the published one, I think you're probably being overly concerned. It's actually a fun con and you'd be surprised the number of people willing to actively listen to anyone they even think might remotely be a "hacker."

If you show up trying to "one up" folks, however, you may not get what you want. It's more of a cooperative, interactive forum; Not a competition.

It's not that I'm trying to "one up" them; it might happen automatically. Let me give you a real-life example: I first published the essay on FIDOnet, as well as list called "Digitaliberty," run by Bill Frezza. Frezza's list paradigm was to develop a way to enable the net to stay free in an unfree world; my idea had the prospect of not only making/keeping the net free, but also dragging the rest of the world into freedom whether it liked it or not. (As well as eliminating war, governments, and a few other minor details.) A few weeks after I started publicizing AP, the list went down for a few days and when it eventually returned, I was not among the subscribers and Frezza studiously ignored my inquiries. As you can well imagine, Frezza's original idea was good, it was merely too limited and was overtaken by progress. It would have been easier for him if he had opposed the fundamental concept of net freedom, or believed my position to be impractical or technically flawed. As it was, there was nothing he could do. Jim Bell jimbell@pacifier.com