ssandfort at ssandfort at
Fri Feb 19 07:10:51 PST 1993

In a recent post, John Gilmore wrote:

    "Keith, Kenneth . . . I am uninterested in censorship of
    discussion of *any* topic on mailing lists through my
    machine . . .  the machine is attached via a worldwide
    network that explicitly promises not to censor any
    traffic UNLESS AND UNTIL a court of law --not you -- has
    decided that that traffic is actually illegal."

Because I agree COMPLETELY with what John wrote, I'm somewhat
miffed at him for his seeming lack of constituency.  Recently, I
posted a notice on this list about a software business contact I
have in South East Asia.  John sent me a terse note asking me not
to "advertise" on the list.

I was a bit surprised at his response for several reasons.
First, a founding Cypherpunk regular, Tim May, suggested I post
my question the list when I asked him if he knew anyone working
on recreational software.  Second, I have had several polite
enquiries from list members who where interested in what I
posted.  Finally, nobody else was offended enough to complain.

I sent a respectful note to John asking him, among other things,
if I had violated some prohibition of which I was unaware.
John's response was:

    "Please consider this message a prohibition against
    advertising.  Apparently nobody else on the list needed
    to hear it, except you, since you are the first person
    to abuse the list in this way."

Now I fully agree that it's John's ball, and I will play by his
rules, but I find it hard to reconcile John's public tolerance
with his private prohibition.  Does ANYONE else feel abused?  I
hope not.  What do others on this list think about "commercial"

I will not "advertise" on the list as long as John prohibits it.
But I sincerely hope his prohibition does not discourage others
from discussing the issues it raises.  I would like to hear what
the rest of you think.

     S a n d y                         ssandfort at

More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list