paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk said:

...

I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves maintain.

If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following:

Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and related issues. A list which proudly proclaims in its "welcome to the list" message:

We do not seek to prevent other people from speaking about their experiences or their opinions.

Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present class structure, then ask yourself which list you know that most closely matches this description, it`s a pretty revealing exercise.

The exercise reveals to me that only by ignoring the first paragraph of your example, the part that reads "Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and related issues." can you make a claim of content based censorship. The purpose of this list was and should be discussion of cryptography and related issues. The fact that some people choose this as a forum for personal attacks and blathering about issues that are not even vaguely related to the discussion of cryptography and related issues does not make it a proper forum for such communication.

...

This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will.

For "Reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will" read "content based censorship".

For "voluntary list" read "voluntary list".

...

If most list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot more than homesteading.

It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be permenant, it is a form of online ethnic cleansing whereby the lists clique of illuminati have taken it upon themselves to remove the elements of the list they feel endanger their position of superiority and respect, the point they have missed is that they have no credibility whatsoever after this incident, as well as a number of other such occurances and therefore are only isolating themselves into their own little world.

The Big Lie once again. yadda yadda yadda "Censorship!" yadda yadda yadda "No Credibility" yadda yadda yadda ad nauseum.

"cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship"

"Idiots will make the networks require censorship" -- Kevin L. Prigge | Some mornings, it's just not worth Systems Software Programmer | chewing through the leather straps. Internet Enterprise - OIT | - Emo Phillips University of Minnesota |