From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo)
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 05:27:14 PDT
To: ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu (L. Detweiler)
Subject: SILLY FLAMES: pseudospoofing
In-Reply-To: <9310180941.AA15703@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Message-ID: <9310181225.AA06177@netcom6.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



L. Detweiler -- shocked, simply shocked, at the realization that
multiple pseudonyms are possible on the net -- explodes:

> ....how can this be a `forum' if an opinion
> is not *representative*? 

Perhaps there are differences between a forum and a voting booth?

> what if a single person just `ganged up' on
> someone they didn't like by overwhelming them with pseudospoofs? what
> if there was *truly* support for some project but a pseudospoofer
> ganged up on the proponents and clobbered them with flames?

Perhaps "support" is better measured by how many people are motivated
enough to go to the effort to make multiple but individually unique,
reputable posts in favor of a proposition, rather than by 
simple numerical polls that abstract away knowledge and
motivation, or by how many True Names position themselves 
with I'm-on-your-side posts. 

On cypherpunks' better days, "support" is measured by what kind 
of code gets written, not by who flames whom how often under
how many names.  Of course we all know that writing code
does not constitute *true* support, since only Democracy is 
The One True Way.

> doesn't
> it throw every `conversation' on this list into spectacularly
> *grotesque* doubt? 

Welcome to the Internet, Detweiler.  Perhaps you might get
together some physical meetings in Colorado, talk to more cypherpunks 
on the phone, look at the pictures in Wired magazine (perhaps also
faked?), etc. if you are so concerned about being ganged up on by 
unknown numbers of strangers.  (Is it better to be ganged up
on by known numbers of strangers?  Why of course, that's called
Democracy).

> the idea
> of `one man one vote' is SACRED.

Hallelujah!  Praise the Lord & pass the card punch!  Let's
vote ourselves bigger paychecks & unlimited medical care.
Let's take a vote on which cypherpunks tools we will implement.
Those who vote with the minority get to do the programming
work, those in the majority get to tell the minority what to write.
I nominate L. Detweiler President of the Cypherpunks.  All in favor 
say "aye" and bow down to His Holiness of the Veiled Booth!

> it is
> *anti egaltarian*. it is a recipe for anarchy

God forbid!  Quick, Detweiler, get out your garlic, raise
up your cross and abjure these crypto-anarchists 
before we spread any further!  Next thing you know
we'll get some elitist, anti-democratic development like
untraceable digital cash.  Some people will accumulate
more digicash than others, and Detweiler won't even know
who they are.  Horrors!  Quick Detweiler,
write your electronic leveling tax protocols before 
its too late.  Better yet, get the majority to vote on
making us evil crypto-anarchists -- only a small cypherpunk
minority once our pseudonyms are unmasked, of course -- make 
us write them for you.  After all, egalitarian software
is a basic human right!

> UNFAIR INFLUENCE. ABUSE
> OF POWER. MANIPULATION. DECEIT. TREACHERY. EXPLOITATION. SECRET CONSPIRACIES.
>...

Isn't it just dreadful?

> p.s. if anyone doesn't hear from me for awhile, assume I've been
> `liquidated' and this isn't really an `open forum' ...

Detweiler to be axed by untraceable crypto-moderator.  Can't figure 
out how to make a pseudonym or use a remailer to avoid his fate in 
Oblivion.  Graphic pictures at 11, may be unsuitable for children!

Nick Szabo				szabo@netcom.com