I think there is probably more value in signed mailing lists than
   encrypted.

   If it is encrypted, and the process is anything less than absolutely
   seamless and transparent, it is likely to drive away a large fraction
   of the readers.

   I hardly have time to read or respond to the messages as it is. Add
   even a few second per message and I would drop out.

   -Lance

   --
   Lance Cottrell
   [1]loki@obscura.com
   On Aug 21, 2013, at 9:49 AM, John Young <[2]jya@pipeline.com> wrote:

     Worse, why limit a cypherpunks list to only those who
     use encryption? Several of the cpunks' bastard offsprings set
     up their own gated communities, unable to put up with those
     who ridiculed their advocacy of really really opinionated
     discussion of the glories of crypto.
     What has been learned since early days of cypherpunks
     is that all encryption is faulty and survives on willing suspension
     of disbelief. Not the math, oh never, which is as infallible as the
     Pope and Muhammad, it's the disbelievers in other people's
     faith-based communities and who are dedicated to finding faults
     over there to divert attention from those in here.
     Still, even back then, encrypted messages were posted by
     enthusiasts. Nobody answered, many said get the fuck out.
     At 12:20 PM 8/21/2013, you wrote:

     What's the point of encrypting the output of a mailing list to which
     anyone can subscribe?
     -jp
     --
     Jeffrey Paul  +1-312-361-0355
     5539 AD00 DE4C 42F3 AFE1 1575 0524 43F4 DF2A 55C2

References

   1. mailto:loki@obscura.com
   2. mailto:jya@pipeline.com