1993-09-27 - Re: saturation tactics?

Header Data

From: Michael Johnson <mpjohnso@nyx.cs.du.edu>
To: “George A. Gleason” <gg@well.sf.ca.us>
Message Hash: ae47b5c2f6fb87793eac90ed6ce5d6f8391c84bfcd20f624db2a89b044814142
Message ID: <Pine.3.05.9309270849.C26891-a100000@nyx>
Reply To: <93Sep26.015035pdt.14005-3@well.sf.ca.us>
UTC Datetime: 1993-09-27 14:36:14 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 27 Sep 93 07:36:14 PDT

Raw message

From: Michael Johnson <mpjohnso@nyx.cs.du.edu>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 93 07:36:14 PDT
To: "George A. Gleason" <gg@well.sf.ca.us>
Subject: Re: saturation tactics?
In-Reply-To: <93Sep26.015035pdt.14005-3@well.sf.ca.us>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.05.9309270849.C26891-a100000@nyx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Sun, 26 Sep 1993, George A. Gleason wrote:

> In a discussion on the Well, some folks were speculating about the idea of
> lots and lots of people & companies applying for those arms export licenses,
> on the basis that they *might* sell crypto to a foreigner, or *might* go on
> an overseas business trip with their laptop with a crypto program on it,
> etc.  This is a great case of an old protest tactic which we used to call
> "saturation," which involves lots and lots of people scrupulously obeying an
> unfair or controversial law to the point where it starts to swamp the
> system.  
> Seeme like it might be worth looking into.  Any comments...?
Sounds expensive at $1,000 per five years per license.  Got any cheaper
ideas, like writing to your Congress person and the President?