Re: Russ Alberry/CAUCE vs. the Cypherpunks (was: Re: RESULT: comp.org.cauc
lcs Mixmaster Remailer wrote:
Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> wrote:
* I am specifically pissed at Igor about trolling for votes on ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ random newsgroups and on Cypherpunks.
In what sense are you using the word "trolling"? Are you saying that the mention of a proposal to ban anonymity is considered "trolling" when posted amongst a group of pro-privacy, pro-anonymity individuals such as the Cypherpunks?
Sounds like he is only objecting to you discussing issues important to you with groups you belong to and groups that you *don't* belong to. Sounds like Chelsea is pushing daddy's fascist agenda at Stanford.
Why is publicly disagreeing with you considered a "propaganda campaign"? Why should the C.A.U.C.E. brand of propaganda be the only variety allowed?
Because fickless ducks live in fear of individuals who threaten their ability to hide under phantom security blankets.
When I first heard of the C.A.U.C.E., my initial thought was that it was a good idea. Finally a means to fight back against the spammers. Now I'm starting to wonder what sort of agenda is driving some of these illogical anti-privacy requirements.
Often, it is just the result of people who come up with some inane brainstorm that looks good on the surface, but are too intellectually lazy to think it through and resent anyone who does so (thus destroying their petty work of self-proclaimed 'genius'. The real losers end up doing a lot of campaigning to make up for the insufficiency of their logic, under the delusion that getting as many others as possible to jump on their bandwagon will somehow increase their low level of self-esteem. Sounds to me like the dweeb is pissed because he had to do a lot of blather-spamming to overcome the effects of Igor's rational and balanced posts on the subject. Perhaps his next project could be to promote a vote on a new value for 'pi'. TruthMonger
I do not think that your message made it to USENET, TruthMonger. igor TruthMonger wrote:
lcs Mixmaster Remailer wrote:
Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> wrote:
* I am specifically pissed at Igor about trolling for votes on ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ random newsgroups and on Cypherpunks.
In what sense are you using the word "trolling"? Are you saying that the mention of a proposal to ban anonymity is considered "trolling" when posted amongst a group of pro-privacy, pro-anonymity individuals such as the Cypherpunks?
Sounds like he is only objecting to you discussing issues important to you with groups you belong to and groups that you *don't* belong to. Sounds like Chelsea is pushing daddy's fascist agenda at Stanford.
Why is publicly disagreeing with you considered a "propaganda campaign"? Why should the C.A.U.C.E. brand of propaganda be the only variety allowed?
Because fickless ducks live in fear of individuals who threaten their ability to hide under phantom security blankets.
When I first heard of the C.A.U.C.E., my initial thought was that it was a good idea. Finally a means to fight back against the spammers. Now I'm starting to wonder what sort of agenda is driving some of these illogical anti-privacy requirements.
Often, it is just the result of people who come up with some inane brainstorm that looks good on the surface, but are too intellectually lazy to think it through and resent anyone who does so (thus destroying their petty work of self-proclaimed 'genius'. The real losers end up doing a lot of campaigning to make up for the insufficiency of their logic, under the delusion that getting as many others as possible to jump on their bandwagon will somehow increase their low level of self-esteem.
Sounds to me like the dweeb is pissed because he had to do a lot of blather-spamming to overcome the effects of Igor's rational and balanced posts on the subject. Perhaps his next project could be to promote a vote on a new value for 'pi'.
TruthMonger
- Igor.
participants (2)
-
ichudov＠Algebra.COM -
TruthMonger