From: mcb@net.bio.net (Michael C. Berch)
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 01:15:18 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Detweiler abuse again
Message-ID: <199402170912.BAA01380@net.bio.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Jim Wise writes:
> > It's really not censorship for Hal or any other remailer operator to
> > say _his_ machines, accounts, reputation, etc., will be used to mail
> > death threats to whitehouse.gov, for example, or mailbombs to
> > newsgroups and mailing lists.
> 
> While it is not censorship as such, it rather seems against our stated 
> goals as cypherpunks to advocate such filtering...not because of what 
> it blocks from our own sites, but it _does_ affect those downstream.  

With due respect for the sentiment, I really think that the concept of
"downstream" will not be with us for very much longer, and in most
places is already quite archaic.  If the net-sites of South Island NZ
wanted the alt.sex groups, they were free to find other sources for
them, such as a commercial service provider.  Getting a free newsfeed
is nice, but it is folly to rely on it.   I think it is a mistake to
base (or debate) ethical questions about what traffic one wishes to
accept and carry upon mechanical matters such as the topology of one
particular transport mechanism for message-based communications.

> Another key point is that we not let our own personal feelings interfere with 
> our political actions.  I'm sure most of us here were offended by the 
> suggestions in the heat of the anonymity debate that all anonymous 
> postings to newsgroups be killed...yet here are cypherpunks advocating the 
> filtering of all Detweiler and Detweiler-seeming posts.  Sure, the guy's 
> a prick, but should we let him turn us into fascists?

Good point.  Depends what you mean by "filtering", though.   I would
prefer that remailer operators and other service providers NOT block
anyone's messages based on content or identity of origin, merely based
on whether or not they interfere with the operation of the service, or
jeopardize the service's future operation (i.e., on legal grounds). 
*But*, I do support the right of individuals and private sites to
"filter" messages based on content or identity of origin, by means of
killfiles or similar.  

--
Michael C. Berch
mcb@net.bio.net / mcb@postmodern.com