Re: request for comment re "contributor-covenant.org"

Somewhat confusing threading here Cari. I see a few possibilities as to what I could do here: * Be vigilant in calling out patriarchal, racist, and generally neoliberal or fascist ideas promoted by some of the more recent arrivals. * This would provided a benchmark on the list indicating that these ideas are not generally accepted. * This would also require me to argue with assholes on the Internet. As the say goes, pigs, mud, etc.. * Filter these people out and try to maintain productive on-topic discussion. * This would be of limited usefulness since people who I generally find to be quality contributors continue to respond to the Stormfront-esque crowd. * Filter the whole list, comb through it periodically to see if there is any useful signal, and call out the most egregious offenses I can find. * This is what I've chosen to do since it is optimal from my time perspective. I think this list is a lost cause at this point. Ever since around the time it became more discoverable after the switch from al-qaeda.net to cpunks.org, and some possibly overzealous cross-posting, the discourse has shifted from actual cypherpunkery to white men complaining about having their privilege eroded on other mailing lists. There are a number of quality contributors that no longer post here, reducing the signal and allowing more noise. I can't bring them back. But I can at least remind anyone more moderate listening that the cypherpunks list wasn't always a far-right discussion group, which I think is the reverence due to the community that used to exist. I'd appreciate any suggestions, onlist or offline, from anyone who thinks similarly of the ideological drift of this list from generally anti-authoritarian to crypto-white nationalism. On Fri, 2016-02-05 at 20:37 +0100, Cari Machet wrote:

Dear ted you are part of the community and you can work to make it better or just complain about yesteryear

On Feb 3, 2016 3:19 AM, "Cari Machet" wrote: Code of conduct no but community agreements yes ... plus social norms and social engineering is alive and well even here on cypherpunks ... should we make a list?

What is comming up here is restorative justice by subjects that have no clue that there is such a concept

On Jan 27, 2016 5:50 PM, "Rayzer" wrote: Zenaan Harkness replies to: 1/27/16, Peter Tonoli wrote:: >> On the other hand, I can't see Cypherpunks agreeing to a 'code of >> > conduct', or adhering to it. > Come on ... surely you jest?!?

When Abbie Hoffman was asked about the nature of the Chicago 7, 6, 8, 10 'conspiracy' he replied:

> "Conspiracy? We can't even agree on lunch."

-- RR

"Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them'

-- Sent from Ubuntu