Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
I realize that normal people are few and far between in cypher punks.
There may be quite a few normal and knowledgeable people left among the subscribers, but most posters are indeed militant homosexual censors who don't care about crypto except to drop a few "kewl" phrases - like Paul Bradley's infamous "brute-force attack on one-time pads".
I am NOT a cypher-punk and I hope that you do not class me as one, I am merely interested in cryptography and believe it or not I actually pick up tips every now and again from the list.
I'm sure you're not a "cypher punk" - you're both too smart and too straight. :-) A while back I saw an announcement of a "cypher punks" meating where Jim Bell was explicitly disinvited, and I announced that I don't consider myself a "cypher punk". Jim Bell is a pro-censorship asshole, but I will defend his freedom of speech nevertheless. Occasional tidbits of useful information do still appear on this list.
I am against moderation on the list and I aggree that Gilmug is a lying cocksucker. Please bear in mind that not everyone on the list is a "jew-hating" faggot with nothing but shit between their ears.
I wholeheartedly agree - however anyone who describes himself as a "cypher punk", after John Gilmore's dishonorable actions, probably is. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
Dale Thorn wrote:
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories. diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up). thats it - Igor.
Delivered-To: reece-cpunks@taz.nceye.net Delivered-To: reece@taz.nceye.net Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:13:00 -0600 (CST) Cc: dlv@bwalk.dm.com, cypherpunks@toad.com, freedom-knights@jetcafe.org Reply-To: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) X-No-Archive: yes Organization: Bool Sheet Software X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk Dale Thorn wrote:
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories. diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up). thats it If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
Bryan Reece wrote:
Dale Thorn wrote:
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories.
diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up).
thats it
If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc. - Igor.
On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
Bryan Reece wrote:
Dale Thorn wrote:
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories.
diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up).
thats it
If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc.
- Igor.
But x should be no more than 24.
aga wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
Bryan Reece wrote:
Dale Thorn wrote:
If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc.
- Igor.
But x should be no more than 24.
Yeah, 24 is a good ballpark figure. - Igor.
On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote:
Delivered-To: reece-cpunks@taz.nceye.net Delivered-To: reece@taz.nceye.net Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:13:00 -0600 (CST) Cc: dlv@bwalk.dm.com, cypherpunks@toad.com, freedom-knights@jetcafe.org Reply-To: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) X-No-Archive: yes Organization: Bool Sheet Software X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk
Dale Thorn wrote:
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories.
diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up).
thats it
If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right. And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS at each location, so you can write some batch programs to save you the manual wwork.
Prof. aga wrote:
On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote:
it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories.
diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up).
thats it
If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right. And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS at each location, so you can write some batch programs to save you the manual wwork.
No, one address is enough. You can look at a Unix tool called procmail, which allows filtering of incoming messages. For example, you could completely insulate yourself from, say, follower of clawed albino. - Igor.
On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
Prof. aga wrote:
On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote:
it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories.
diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up).
thats it
If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right. And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS at each location, so you can write some batch programs to save you the manual wwork.
No, one address is enough. You can look at a Unix tool called procmail, which allows filtering of incoming messages. For example, you could completely insulate yourself from, say, follower of clawed albino.
- Igor.
But I am not the one who needs insulated. I have a nice ISP who does not get intimidated, but there are a dozen other guys out there who the bitch has tried to eliminate access for in the past couple of years, so the bitch is about to get exposed. I have people working who will find out the real name of that cunt in the near future.
Mr. Thorn said:
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. <snip> In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
Subscribe to unfiltered + flames. Anything that shows up twice was "filtered". Subscribe to unfiltered + flames and then filter all mail from flames to a seperate "folder" to check at your leasure.
snow wrote:
Mr. Thorn said:
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. <snip> In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts? Subscribe to unfiltered + flames. Anything that shows up twice was "filtered". Subscribe to unfiltered + flames and then filter all mail from flames to a seperate "folder" to check at your leasure.
I'm already getting multiple copies of messages I can't account for. The frequency and number seem to be random, and I'm not counting forwarded stuff. Take the posts from the most "trusted" people. Subtract out any personal cc's, account for additional lists subscribed to, compare for similar (but not identical) posts, and still the numbers don't add up.
On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote:
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
You can not. You need another account. I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting for him to respond. Do you want another account to get the censored list at?
Delivered-To: reece-cpunks@taz.nceye.net Delivered-To: reece@taz.nceye.net Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:52:58 -0500 (EST) From: aga <aga@dhp.com> cc: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" <dlv@bwalk.dm.com>, cypherpunks@toad.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Precedence: bulk On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote:
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
Someone wrote to me:
Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL people will have to be filtered.
Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
You can not. You need another account. Not quite true. I'm going to use one account on a host running qmail to find the differences between the lists (one will go to accountname-mod@qmailhost, the other to accountname-raw, and a cron job will do the comparisons every few minutes). If you have an account on a unix box running sendmail, you can have .forward run a program to sort messages out by sender into separate files for normal mail, the raw list, and the moderated list. I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting for him to respond. Do you want another account to get the censored list at?
aga wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote:
Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts?
You can not. You need another account. I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting for him to respond. Do you want another account to get the censored list at?
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. We already get the censored stuff on the alleged-to-be "unedited" list, so by looking at the censored list only, we can do the subtraction more reliably than Sandfort. Just the censored list is needed, not the cut-out stuff, as far as I know.
participants (7)
-
aga -
Bryan Reece -
Dale Thorn -
dlv＠bwalk.dm.com -
ichudov＠algebra.com -
snow -
Toto