new list ?
Georgi Guninski
guninski at guninski.com
Sun Sep 4 22:47:01 PDT 2016
new list(s) was already suggested these days.
please go and make a few. there are even free lists providers.
people who want to subscribe, will subscribe. isn't this obvious?
i suppose you can name them whatever you want.
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 03:12:01PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Folks who want their cypher unsullied have plenty of many and varied
> lists, but should have their full pure cyphered punk (whatever that
> means to them) without the "stress" of non cypher which appears
> evidently stressful.
>
> As was said last year, my personal intent is to respect the intenet of
> the founders of this forum/list.
>
> Lists are neither complicated, difficult nor with singificant overhead,
> to run.
>
> And it appears evident there is a smallish but loud number of
> emotionally pained individuals who want to not be adulterated by calls
> to action, discussion of politics, defense of fundamental and essential
> principles to any community we can imagine, or anything outside their
> personal expectations for what the cypherpunks list "should be".
>
> Far be it for us to cause any undue stress to the poor darlings.
>
>
> -----------------
> So, once again, there is a fair whack of offlist, and in the past on
> list, support for an similar but alternative email mailing list.
>
> Of course there has also been both on and offlist calls to not split the
> list.
>
> The possible 'new list' would be "just like cypherpunks, only a little
> less elitist about what can be discussed", including and especially
> tech, cypher, politico, anarcho, actiono, liberto and any other old o,
> topics :)
>
> In fact, this alternative list is not elitist at all - if you wanna talk
> it, bloody well talk it, the list shall forever be uncesored, just
> expect no mercy on the "constructive" or "vehement" feedback side :)
>
> If "you can't HANDLE the response!" then stick to cyphussy-whipped.
>
> One could even consider this new list an "anarchist" list.
>
> The only (should be self evident) proviso is that your speech be lawful
> in the jurisdiction of the listserv operator, for (what ought be self
> evidently) obvious reasons.
> -----------------
>
>
> And now, the final call! ::
>
> Are there any loud "no, please don't split the list" calls which can
> make a convincing argument as to why a few cotton wool footed,
> excessively schooled, overly emotional Westerners with delicate
> communication sensibilities and inadequate personal technical
> ability, ought not have their little CIA dominated pow wow room under
> the current name, and a new anarchist list under a slightly
> distinguished and eminently distinguishable alternative name?
>
> As a little reminder, alternative alternative lists, providing abundent
> opportunity for free form but self moderated or actually censored
> crypto techno discussion are, for example:
>
> nettime
> metzdowd
> securityfocus
> many universities
> djb lists
> eff
> tor-talk, tor-project etc
> many newsgroups
> and a whole internet more, just a search away
>
>
> Finally, before those tenderfoots jump in with "yes please", perhaps
> read this again:
> http://cryptome.org/2013/09/cpunks-crypto.htm
>
> including its many choice quotes including:
>
> - "the political has won out over the technical".
>
>
> - this one reminds of the total overthrow and take over of Tor Inc
> that's just gone down in front of us all, along with the public,
> professional and very personal destruction of Jacob Applebaum:
>
> "What has been shown in the discussion is that the technical wizards
> are not nearly as competent at the messy political"
>
>
> - "petty squabblling and exchange of slurs has replaced rational
> discourse. Thus the convo has become politicized with as much
> stupidity and ignorance as sharp thinking and mutual respect"
>
>
> Do bring your best, and best regards to all,
> Zenaan
More information about the cypherpunks
mailing list