request for comment re "contributor-covenant.org"

Tue Feb 9 05:44:40 PST 2016

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/08/2016 09:15 PM, shakeitoff at ghostmail.com wrote:

> Hi Ted,
> 
> Yes, I agree with you.

As well you might:  It appears that Ted has made six posts to the
CPunks list since June of last year.  Each consisted of complaints
about the ideological impurity a.k.a. political incorrectness of
the CPunks list and those who post to it.

Ted and "shakeitoff at ghostmail.com" have a lot in common, including
their vocabulary, grammatical construction, New Left ideology and
a hostile attitude toward what passes for "native culture" on the
CPunks list.  A few posts from years earlier suggest that Ted
probably exists somewhere in meatspace, whereas
shakeitoff at ghostmail.com appears to exist only as a pseudonym
created for a single purpose.

> Supposedly, this list was for anarchists who wanted to advance 
> strong cryptography and individual liberty.
> 
> However, it seems like the large majority of postings here are 
> unfortunately not about cryptography, nor anarchy.  Agreed
> about the white fascism.

Our morally superior critic shakeitoff at ghostmail.com appeared to
come here to help us eliminate degrading, insulting and hurtful
language on the CPunks list by installing a censorship regime.
But now I see a New Left ideologue providing us with yet another
demonstration that "Those who make and enforce the law are above
the law."

Authoritarian much lately, shakeitoff at ghostmail.com?  No matter:
The CPunks list will not censor you.

> The ideal would be idea to have more code, more crypto.

Please cite examples of your contributions to the creation,
vetting, promotion, defense of, or end user tech support for "more
code, more crypto."

> However, as you said, it might be a lost cause. Which is quite 
> sad, considering what it originally represented. But thanks
> for writing this nonetheless :)

It would make sense to abandon PC trolling of the CPunks list as a
lost cause.  Most of the participants in the CPunks list self
identify as Anarchist or Libertarian, both of which indicate high
sales resistance to New Left ideology.  You will not beat a crowd
that includes veterans of USENET in open battle.  Uncommitted
third parties do not know or care that the CPunks list exists, so
what potentially receptive audience do you address?

> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Ted Smith <tedks at riseup.net 
> <mailto:tedks at riseup.net>> wrote:

>> 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.

Racist much lately, Ted?  No matter:  The CPunks list will not
censor you.

Several people on the list have taken the issues raised by
shakeitoff at ghostmailseriously enough to discuss them rationally.
"Counterfeit coins exist because there was, first, real gold."
One should always assume good faith on the part of correspondents,
until persuasive evidence indicates otherwise.

But apparently shakeitoff at ghostmail.com and Ted want more:
Committed ideological converts who will trash the CPunks list, an
ongoing and rather successful experiment in free speech, by
installing a shiny new censorship regime.  If "they" can't get
their way, at least they can stamp their little feet and call
people names.

request for comment re &quot;contributor-covenant.org&quot;

request for comment re "contributor-covenant.org"