From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 21:36:48 +0800
To: ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com
Subject: Re: The Interlinked Cypherpunks Lists? (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199705140034.TAA23384@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <199705141210.NAA01034@server.test.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com> writes:
> [...]
> I don't want it known who is subscribed to lists through SSZ, in short:
> It isn't any of your damn business and quit asking.

Oh.  I guess that explains the blank message I got back from
majordomo@ssz.com!  I counted that as no one subscribed (or inactive).
So I guess the count of cypherpunks subscribers is an underestimate
having discounted anyone subscribed through ssz.com.

Would you be interested to reveal the number of subscribers for
counting purposes?  (Not a big deal if you're not).

> > The only true reliability can be achieved by subscribing to two or more
> > cypherpunks sites, and eliminating duplicates. Reliability has its costs.
> 
> As do freedom, privacy, anonymity, etc.

If you have a shell account, you could run an email concentrator
(remove duplicates) with procmail, and then down load only the non
duplicates.  With this setup you could subscribe to all 3 lists and
not notice any outages.

Adam
-- 
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`