list of people censored on lists.debian.org
zen at freedbms.net
Sat Mar 14 06:17:58 PDT 2020
your ongoing battle appears to be staunch, humorous, challenging, depressing, and uplifting all at the same time. We feel for ya.
I'm wondering if you ever subscribed to the cypherpunks mailing list last year? It's a small community, but passionate, and at least so far as the law allows, uncensored.
If it floats yer boat, perhaps join the rest of us outcast n.ggers at the cypherpunks corral ;)
At the moment no easy answers have presented themselves, in respect of an existing "community" such as Debian, except to rebuild a worthy community from scratch, with vigilant anti-censorship at its foundation, and in the face of what's happened to Linus, RMS and ESR in the last 12 months, "founders right to be and make an ass of him or herself" I guess :D (since of course, that which makes an ass of onesself, is of course in the eye of the snowflake, e.g. https://babylonbee.com/news/massive-plank-appears-in-adam-schiffs-eye-as-he-accuses-donald-trump-of-lying).
In any case, I've no doubt many are very proud of you, and of the posts you have no doubt "inspired", hint hint, nudge nudge, and a few of which have been leaked to the public (and to my very grateful eyes just now) by LWN:
Handling attacks on a community
.. It is not hard to find examples of the kinds of messages that are being targeted (e.g. here, here, here, and here for fairly recent examples).
[Snowflake trigger warning, the next 4 messages may well trigger you if you are a CoC-wielding, wilting snowflake.]
delegation for the Anti-Anti-Harassment team
access an independent, uncensored version of Planet Debian
Outreachy favouritism and wasted Debian money
are Debian mentors nuts? the DebConf scandal
It is also clear that many participants on the mailing list have concluded who is behind at least some of the anonymous/pseudonymous attacks: Daniel Pocock. In fact, Pocock was the subject of a different message from Hartman on debian-project; while he did not directly connect the dots between the messages and his action expelling Pocock from the Debian project entirely, it is hard not to come to the conclusion that the two are related.
Bravo muffaluggerah, bravo! :D Rip-roaringly bloody good posts, whether wink winked by yourself, or inspired via others..
FWIW Daniel, some of us wholeheartedly approve of your anti-PC crusade :) -- the "politically correct" bullshit being elevated in the world today is a form of insanity. Opposing such insanity is one of our sacred duties. But such insanity is being funded far and wide, so it can get a bit depressing at times :(
Anyway, hat tip to you, Daniel.
Here's a cypherpunks post from a while back which is sort of on-topic (it's a couple 4 letter words, so a bit guttery):
On a completely related topic to this "Git falls" email, "get black holed, start oil drilling".
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 11:22:19AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:21:58PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I've been looking through debian-private and I found messages from
> > Alexander Wirt (formorer) about censoring various people from
> > lists.debian.org. Some of those messages appear to be defamatory. You
> > are in BCC because your name appears in debian-private.
> > I've written a blog to help people work around censorship and other
> > dishonest practices, please tell me if this is helpful for you:
> > https://danielpocock.com/freedom-and-censorship-on-mailing-lists/
> > Does anybody know any other victims of censorship in Debian or any other
> > free software community?
> > Stay free,
> > Daniel
> Hi Daniel,
> Thank you very much for the time and care you've taken to write up
> your above blog.
> It's always reassuring to see someone notice, let alone take action,
> in relation to one or another of our freedoms - be that the freedom
> to communicate, the freedom to move and travel anonymously within our
> communities, or the freedom to engage in a vigorous and vicious
> verbal stoush with a "sworn arch enemy" for a few days, and turn
> around afterwards and still continue communicating with them - or not
> - as we so freely choose.
> When the screaming banshee snowflakes do all in their power to drown
> out discussion of rights, principles and freedoms because "muh safe
> space" and "how dare you f*ck with my safe comfy space, I'll have you
> censored, hounded out of the community, and have you lose your job to
> boot, because you said something I don't like", unfrotunately there
> are some list admins who happily ban the one exercising the free
> speech, and not the one wanting to "shut it all down, muh safe space!"
> And so the bannings, kickings, or worse even the shadow bannings are
> imposed and dissent is met with more bannings and finally a massive
> swinging CoC dangled in front "the community" - a set of rules or
> most often just a statement or 3 about how we having to be good to
> one another, which CoC is thereafter used as the justification for
> more bannings and censorship.
> If there is to be any line in the sand, what ought that line be?
> From a mailing list administrator's point of view, expecting them to
> oppose "the statute law" is too much - many would simply close up
> shop altogether.
> So in our present world, that is perhaps, perhaps, the only
> reasonably acceptable line for "you've crossed the line on free
> speech", and even then bannings or removal probably should not happen
> unless a court order is served on the list administrator.
> That's called presumption of innocence and assuming we do in fact
> have the right to live our rights.
> I appreciate your blog, and perhaps a few on the CypherPunks list may
> also appreciate it - CyphePunks is one of the few mailing lists that
> still strives to be staunch in standing for free speech - including
> the right of those who want to say "shut it down". Not the easiest
> journey apparently...
> Re RMS, I emailed him and encouraged him to withdraw his respective
> resignations (from FSF and MIT) - I don't know what the current
> status is.
> The email may be found here:
> reaching out -- was Re: Richard Stallman Gets SJW'd
> And there's a whole (17 email) thread earlier, starting here:
> Although a Google (Jewgle) search for "stallman site:lists.cpunks.org":
> Brings up as at 20191009 11:15, only the following FOUR results:
> And do NOTE, I have disabled google's "safe search" and anything
> similar I could find.
> This campaign/war against our basic rights, goes incredibly deep,
> right into the heart of "Silicon Valley" in bed with the NSA, CIA etc.
> See also:
> on the necessity of a @snowflake codedoc annotation
More information about the cypherpunks