On 11/20/22, Douglas Lucas <dal@riseup.net> wrote:
Regarding the first article, I have no way of knowing why it says that, but my understanding is that it is common for targeted groups to both have agents placed in them to redirect internal activities, and to also be misrepresented publicly.
So your theory is that if an individual or group has opponents, then they're off the hook should a credible accusation show up, because maybe the accusation isn't actually credible. Since all individuals and groups have opponents, they're all off scot free now, innocent of any credible accusation.
I don't mean to argue with you. I like you. The things you are saying here seem somewhat over the top to me. The article of course has value, nor is anyone off scot free.
There is a way of knowing why the article says that. It's an ancient technique called "reading."
I think bottom line, cypherpunks believes Assadnge can delete any leak, kick any source in the head, and assist any dictator, and it's justified becuase [insert fanboy bullshit here].
It is completely unacceptable to delete a leak. I'm actually similarly upset with other things like what you describe (like when greg did not re-add everybody after everybody was removed from the list) -- (or when I gave sharp political stimulation to cecilia when she was asking for help before she died) -- these behaviors are _severely harmful_.
I'm ashamed to have wasted so much time on this list today. I'm de-subscribing. Jack off to narcissists deleting leaks and climbing the ladder by stepping on the heads of their sources yourselves.
I'm not doing this, Douglas, I'm a troll here. I'm saying we need to _recover the leaks_. What is important is _recovering the leaks_. If that means sueing WL or somesuch to do so, that's an avenue.