-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tim wrote: On Tuesday, November 13, 2001, at 11:20 AM, Faustine wrote:

Fine. I dont know why you seem to be missing my point: being provoked into incriminating yourself by an anonymous troll is an entirely different issue from discussing the substance of whatever it is you happen to be doing. No, _you_ miss the point: that I was not "incriminating" myself in any way.

I'll bet you all were running the risk of facing arbitrary enforcement of a whole slew of restrictions on firearms, explosives, etc. Talking about organized training in a public forum isn't going to make it any easier for you.

You and your kind need to read up on Burroughs' "The Policeman Inside." "If we do not censor ourselves, others will do it for us." "Cypherpunks should voluntarily restrict the topics they discuss." "We should impose voluntary self-labeling of all posts, so that Congress will not." "I must not think certain thoughts, and I must report others who do."

Quite a nice little collection of straw men you have there. Too bad for you they have nothing to do with what I think. The archives speak for themselves; I doubt you can find one post where I said any of that claptrap.

I just happen to have this gut-level common sense belief that if people might be able to use something against any given person, it's counterproductive and potentially dangerous to broadcast it the way you always do.

...

Ah, weapons training by me and my friends is somehow counterproductive and dangerous? The fact that the First and Second Amendments protect such activities is counterproductive and dangerous to you?

Absolutely not. I've made it crystal clear how I feel about gun ownership, the right to defend one's life and property, and the first and second amendments. I draw the line at initiating force though. What I find dangerous and counterproductive is your repeated escalation and provocation of law enforcement. Surely you knew by responding to the troll you'd be kicking it up yet another notch. What's the point? Aren't you in enough of a balance of terror already? I guess not.

Please explain how my one paragraph summary of my weekend activities provided "dangerous" people with knowledge they didn't already have.

The dangerous people I have in mind are all the pissed-off federal agents on the "domestic terrorist" jihad who are circling the wagons and looking for more rope to hang you with. I have no idea how much they knew about whatever you were doing, but it was the first time I ever saw you speak as if you're getting something in particular organized. That's the way it came across. How much of all this boils down to the fact that you profoundly relish playing high-stakes intimidation games and would love to be known far and wide as a "force to be reckoned with"? Just a thought.

Your "policeman inside" has been getting way too loud. Stop listening to her or him.

Bah, I just believe in taking personal responsibility for my statements and actions in a public forum. Show me where I ever said anything pro-censorship.

Having moral courage is one thing, playing straight into the hands of people > who wish you ill is quite another. It's none of my business what you do, but > I'll be damned if I don't have the right to say I think you're making a mistake by talking about it.

...

Your concern for me is touching, but it is inappropropriate. Some kind of chick thing, I guess.

Nah, just a common human feeling called sympathy.

Butt out.

As you wish.

Also, your comments were a lot more than concerns about me. You also implied that my exercise of my fundamental rights of free speech, free association, Second Amendment rights, etc. was somehow putting the list and its members at risk.

No, just that due to your wee touch of megalomania, you didn't much mind when the troll was characterizing the entire group as having something rightfully to fear from the sedition laws because of support for encryption itself. That's not right.

If you'll look at the archives, we had this conversation a few months ago. Nothing has changed. Why do you continue to waste our time, then? And since you have repeatedly urged that I simply filter you out, I say, "Physician, heal thyself."

What makes you think I want or need to filter you?

Meanwhile, I'll continue to talk about what I think is important. All of you who are calling for restraint, for self-labeling, for installing new moderators...I suggest you either start a new mailing list or set up a CDR node implementing your policies on restraint, labeling, and niceness.

Please direct your rant to the appropriate person(s) or anyone remotely connected to the above complaints. Thanks! ~Faustine. *** The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedoms. - --William O. Douglas, Associate Justice, US Supreme Court -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBO/GfFPg5Tuca7bfvEQJLowCeMFnCaK1wiH9AOyqTCvGj+TZevHIAoMDp /TGbG9i7M4wg4cVBwiyWHaH0 =74YG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----