New list confirmation (Re: cpunks list relocation imminent

Mirimir mirimir at riseup.net
Thu Sep 8 19:03:13 PDT 2016


On 09/08/2016 07:39 PM, Steve Kinney wrote:
> On 09/05/2016 12:15 PM, Александр wrote:
>> forwarding part of my private conversation to the whole list:
> 
>> The new list is not the preferable solution, you know. It's the
>> only thing we see right now, but... We should realize, that this
>> splitting up will KILL the original list. It will kill the whole
>> concept and the core idea of the Cypher-Punk list/movement.
> 
>> The Snowden revelations and all the shit going on in the world in
>> the last 10 years has brought us (people with brain & spirit) to a
>> clear and unambiguous understanding that *"THE CYPHERPUNK
>> LIST-CONCEPT MUST EVOLVE, -> THUS MUST BE CHANGED, BECOMING MUCH
>> BROADER". *And the focus, as John Young wrote, cannot be on
>> Apolitical (relatively) crypto-math-numbers only as it was
>> before...
> 
>> Times have irreversibly changed -> thus the issues for discussion
>> must be much much *BROADER*.
> 
> Well that's odd.  I wonder what it's about?  Splitting the list into
> what?  Two with different themes?  One Moderated and one Unmoderated?

There are many lists out there for stuff that Александр and Zenaan are
posting. It's not that cypherpunk is apolitical. Rather, it's that stuff
which simply bashes one side or the other, but has no particular
connection to crypto and its social/economic/political role/potential is
just plainly off-topic.

> If the latter, that's a perilous course.  One sees a lot of "twin"
> lists and such that are one sterile and stereotyped, the other totally
> overrun with tards.  Because once upon a time, half or more of the
> people on the original list who took an interest in keeping it alive
> /without/ censorship bailed, and those who stayed behind were
> gradually overwhelmed.

There's no need to do anything with the cypherpunks list. If people
object to off-topic crap, they can say so. If people object to being
criticized for posting off-topic crap, they can deal with it or leave.
That's just how unmoderated lists work.

> When the means to eliminate a public voice by direct force are not
> practicable, death by a thousand paper cuts may get the job done.
> Splitting an online forum may be a decisive move in that direction, or
> harmless and productive, depending the situation.  As someone already
> pointed out, there is already a cryptography list, which seems to
> provide more or less what any advocates for moderation could ask for.
> 
> People have been talking about the CPunks list charter.  I have not
> seen it.  What Sovereign signed it, and what powers does the Crown
> delegate to us, for what tribute in return?  Just curious.
> 
> Will post a message to this same thread that enlarges on "my" input to
> the "public" conversation.
> 
>> 
> 
> 


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list