1994-05-31 - Re: Detweiler’s motivations

Header Data

From: Eli Brandt <ebrandt@jarthur.cs.hmc.edu>
To: cypherpunks list <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Message Hash: c79e82459f5ea95becb6c5165bece6813caf82ce826fa621637d3443740e8369
Message ID: <9405310059.AA25238@toad.com>
Reply To: <9405302236.AA24055@flammulated.owlnet.rice.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-05-31 00:59:12 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 30 May 94 17:59:12 PDT

Raw message

From: Eli Brandt <ebrandt@jarthur.cs.hmc.edu>
Date: Mon, 30 May 94 17:59:12 PDT
To: cypherpunks list <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: Re: Detweiler's motivations
In-Reply-To: <9405302236.AA24055@flammulated.owlnet.rice.edu>
Message-ID: <9405310059.AA25238@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Karl said:
> I agree it is difficult to determine Detweiler's motivations; I've
> carried on quite civil email exchanges with him... but the posts from
> tmp@netcom.com are quite bizzare.

He's still mostly normal in e-mail.  However, I think it's best to be
careful what you say.  I once responded to a question of his about
actual instances of PSEUDOSPOOFING; I mentioned a user here who spent
some time replying to himself on rec.music.industrial.  His response
was something along the lines of "hee hee you're a tentacle", and
now look what he's doing to talk.politics.crypto et al....

Hal's analysis seems plausible to me.  This whole self-reply cascade
has got to be some kind of surreal propaganda maneuver.

   Eli   ebrandt@hmc.edu







Thread