In the light of recent developments concerning government cryptography initiatives, we might soon find ourselves innundated by working press.

Given this, I think that the name "cypherpunks" produces the wrong connotations -- it makes us sound like criminals when we are in fact people who are interested in expanding personal privacy with technology. Often, little things like this end up being of tremendous importance in the long haul.

I would propose changing the name of the mailing list to "cryptoprivacy" or something similar. It denotes what we are about in a way that mundane people understand better, and it portrays us in the proper light -- as people struggling to improve the prospects for personal freedom, not a bunch of "punks".

Perry

Perry, I'm absolutely stunned. What next: should we all make sure we shave every day (women: don't forget those legs and armpits!)? Or make tcmay remove the word "anarchy" and other ungood words from his .sig? Anyone who feels like talking to the press or lobbying her representatives (and I'm not claiming that those tactics are either good or bad) can wear a suit, makeup, a respectable haircut, or whatever--that's their decision. I can understand the need to confront this issue as a large and united group, and I suspect that other groups like the EFF, CPSR, etc., are better for that purpose anyway. You don't need to mention that you're a "cypherpunk" when dealing with media or government officials if you think that'll diminish your credibility or legitimacy. It's easy to be idealistic when things are good. At the _very first hint_ of trouble, we shouldn't immediately cower and go straight (this may seem like an exaggeration, but the name-change proposal strikes me as a dangerous first step). Shit, we're not even doing anything _illegal_. Relax. Love and Kisses, --Dave.