request for comment re "contributor-covenant.org"
carimachet at gmail.com
Tue Feb 9 08:31:03 PST 2016
love it ! thanks ted
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:42 PM, Ted Smith <tedks at riseup.net> wrote:
> 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
> * 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
> * 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" <carimachet at gmail.com> 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" <Rayzer at riseup.net> 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
carimachet at gmail.com
Syria +963-099 277 3243
Amman +962 077 636 9407
Berlin +49 152 11779219
Reykjavik +354 894 8650
Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the
addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this
information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without
permission is strictly prohibited.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 5980 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the cypherpunks