Igor sez:

Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy.

I question this, too. What, exactly, is the criterion? Cypherpunks charter sez: The cypherpunks list is a forum for discussing personal defenses for privacy in the digital domain. <Keep in mind I didn't read the described article> How does personal attacks through forged and anonymous mail not fit this topic? However, I _do_ have to say such a topic would have to keep with a descriptive attitude, rather than demonstrative... :-) On another note, even though some messages which may be of interest may get lost in the shuffle, I do like the reduced volume, esp. since I get listmail at work. Unfortunately, the reduced mail is a result of censorship... :-( ~ Patrick

---------- From: ichudov@algebra.com[SMTP:ichudov@algebra.com] Sent: Friday, January 24, 1997 2:33 AM To: Cypherpunks Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list

I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection policy.

My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames mailing list.

You can receive a copy of my article by an email request.

The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including its quoted part.

Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy.

I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy the current readership.

- Igor.