request for comment re "contributor-covenant.org"

[Zenaan Harkness]

On 1/29/16, shakeitoff at ghostmail.com <shakeitoff at ghostmail.com> wrote:
>>> Genuinely anti-social communication is actively discouraged, and this
>>> includes
>>> those who communicate deceptively regarding their own needs and or
>>> social
>>>environment requirements, as well as those who communicate in a passive
>>> aggressive way. If you this any of these types of communication may apply
>>> to
>>> you, then be prepared to suffer the consequences should you join this
>>> mailing
>>> list- we shall roast you in words, with glee!
>
> Why doesn't the gleeful roasting extend to the bigotry and chauvinism on
> this list? Why are these silently accepted?

Who's "job" is that? Are you defining this job for someone other than yourself?


> Cypherpunks defines government as “a home for bullies masquerading as a
> collective defense.” Interestingly, that is how I would describe your above
> approach.

These two sentences are approaching incoherent. Would you like to try
again? It is probably not constructive for me to respond to
incoherence - there is perhaps some truth or pain or seeking which has
not been expressed clearly, which I would hope you feel confident
about expressing, or re- attempting to express - such is in our
collective interests.


> Be careful of becoming the oppressor.

Agreed.


> Look around. Do the people around you look like you? Think like you? Come
> from the same background as you?
>
> This is a problem.

So say you.

If you wish an intelligent discourse, please put more effort into
explaining this "problem" you assert, describing why you think there
is a problem, etc in a way which others might be able to agree with
you - asserting that something is a problem, in and of itself, says
close to nothing, and is therefore not useful. You might want others
to agree with you that there is a problem, here in this tiny (!!)
corner of the world called the cypherpunks mailing list. You might
even be able to cite coherent facts demonstrating your position - none
of this means I or any other individual has to agree with you, though
some may.

Making you assertion is presently an island waiting for supporters -
nothing more than a political position in search of part members. This
is not the place for such superficiality. I personally seek deeper
conversation.


> The lack of diversity in this group is not a magical
> phenomenon without a root cause.

Your assertions leave me raising my eyebrows.


> There is a deeper problem.

And again.

> If (and how) this should change is up to this
> community.

Possible actions based on unsubstantiated presumptions. This -is-
objectionable to me.

You want me to buy in to your political cause? You might consider
presenting a more substantial position, perhaps one based in fact.


> Sadly, the ideals of this community are often lost in the (typically
> incoherent) bigotry spewing from the trolls.

This is flame bait. Persistent flame baiting is regarded as trolling.


> 4.12.4. "Crypto Anarchy sounds too wild for me."
>  - I accept that many people will find the implications of
>  crypto anarchy (which follows in turn from the existence of
>  strong cryptography, via the Crypto Anarchy Principle) to
>  be more than they can accept.
>
>  - This is OK (not that you need my OK!). The house of
>  Cypherpunks has many rooms.
>
> All are welcome. I hope.

We share the same hope. For me it is a certainty - I need no hope
about "all being welcome", since it is already a fact.

Your assertions to the contrary notwithstanding...


>>> There are forums and mailing lists which are suitable for those who have
>>> learning difficulties (reference?), for those who need an emotionally
>>> sensitive
>>> environment (be sure to check if you need professional medical or
>>> psychological support), and for those who are beginniners in the field
>>> of
>>> technology discussed on this mailing list.
>
> Wow. How fucking elitist can you be?

Is it your position that humans in general have no right to create
communication spaces, semi public as this one is, that fit their
desires?

Do you assert that you would like a particular communication space to
exist, which does not currently exist, but which is somehow similar to
cypherpunks mailing list, but perhaps a little different?

If so, have you tried to create such a space?

Or are you simply begrudging this space that has been created not by
you, and not specifically for you (although you are welcome), for some
reasons (perhaps it does not quite meet your expectations?, perhaps
you have taken certain words posted as adversarial to your own actual
intentions to participate?)?

With your assertion of problems existing in this particular space,
without any substantiation of fact, there is not much of a
conversation besides "I want more of something undefined and other
should provide it to me" is there?

Before I turn my own vehemence into another strawman, perhaps
reconsider your presentation/ wording?

Creating spaces in this world that -you- want, is up to you. You may
of course try to enroll others into you intentions, but at the moment,
you might like to work on refining that last bit...

Good luck,
Zenaan