1994-07-13 - Re: TC May’s policy change proposal

Header Data

From: Jeff Gostin <jgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 4f8667188ce7e25bb9bbcac4fa3af087f76ad5b14a41eb892d370a60fb4fe339
Message ID: <940713182417q8qjgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-13 23:20:44 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 16:20:44 PDT

Raw message

From: Jeff Gostin <jgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 16:20:44 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: TC May's policy change proposal
Message-ID: <940713182417q8qjgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) writes:

> 1. Could we people make an effort to pick reasonably meaningful thread
> titles?
     Agreed. A few people on this list have mailed me privately (thanx for
the discretion, guys!) and told me my Subject: headers were coming up as
(None). All mailing lists are gated to local newsgroups here at Eternal.
As a result, my newsreader doesn't seem to like maintaining subject
headers on mailing list mail. It's a known bug... *sigh*

     "Ok," you ask,"...what's the point?" The point is this: If I can take
the time to manually change the subject, working around an annoying bug in
my software (it'll be fixed literally RSN, BTW), everyone else can take
the time to do it right. :-)

> 2. People should feel free to edit the subject line to better reflect
> the topic of their post.
     Agreed. Since I can't preserve the subject heading as a result of
aforementioned cyber-roach (hey, I _like_ that term!), I _have_ to make up
creative titles. So can all of you. You've shown you're smart, and by
being a 'punk, you've shown you care about privacy, crypto, and all that
other good stuff. Don't skimp on subjects. :-)

> 3. Forwards are really getting out of hand. It seems that the "Four
> Letter Acronyms" of CPSR, EPIC, ACLU, and EFF (an honorary FLA)
     Agreed, again. Perhaps we should change "policy" to dictate that only
members of the organization in question should forward "infograms" to the
list. Forwarded Usenet posts should be pointered and perhaps summarized.
Beyond that is wasted traffic, IMHO.

> This list is not a place to ask 500-600 people "What's so bad about
> Clipper?" or "Can't the NSA break any cipher with enough effort?"
     Do you mean to imply that "Everything" and "Yes" aren't good enough
answers from 500-600 people? :-)

                                   --Jeff
--
======  ======    +----------------jgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us----------------+
  ==    ==        | The new, improved, environmentally safe, bigger, better,|
  ==    ==  -=    | faster, hypo-allergenic, AND politically correct .sig.  |
====    ======    | Now with a new fresh lemon scent!                       |
PGP Key Available +---------------------------------------------------------+ 





Thread