From: dmandl@panix.com (David Mandl)
Date: Sat, 28 May 94 23:27:04 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: The Assault on Unicorn has Begun
Message-ID: <199405290626.AA07616@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Some random and unorganized thoughts on this whole issue from the list's
token anti-capitalist:

Bob Black (the anarchist) has declared that he has a standing "no first
use" policy regarding the state.  He won't sic the cops on anyone unless
they do it first.  Noam Chomsky has publicly stated that, on principle, he
won't sue anyone for defamation or libel no matter what they do--and he's
had plenty of opportunities.  I feel the same way (though I don't see
completely eye-to-eye with either of those guys).  I would have to be
harmed in a VERY serious way before I'd consider calling the cops.  As for
lawsuits, pretty much the same thing goes, and I almost can't imagine suing
anyone for something they _say_ about me.  This is something I never think
about; it seems absolutely basic to my anarchist views.

Unicorn: If you choose to be involved with the straight business world,
you've got to deal with the heat.  MY views could potentially get me in
much more hot water than yours could, but I (grudgingly) accept the risk.
I'm not dying to have the capitalists I work for see my rants, but if they
do, I've got to live with it.  They know me and know that I've never
screwed them, and they can believe what they want to believe.  I'm not
thrilled about this, but c'est la vie.

You wimped out at the very first sign of heat, and invoked the LAW (i.e,
the state) as your first line of defense.  I don't think you specified
exactly what the settlement with tmp was, but what could it have possibly
been?  Payment to you?  How would that have helped assuage the concerns of
your business associates?  An apology from tmp to the associates?  Big
deal.  The guy's obviously a nut-ball, and you could have explained that;
presumably the associates have some amount of trust in you.  If it _was_ a
payment, that's just sleazy and greedy, the standard ambulance-chaser
cliche ("You've done irreparable damage to me, but maybe if you agreed to
pay me $3,000...").  And how could the tiny amount tmp could afford
compensate for the "millions" of dollars you've lost?  If the settlement
was for an apology, again, big deal--do the associates take this anonymous
net.lunatic seriously enough that an apology would make everything all
better?  And you now look silly, because he's reneged on that part of the
deal anyway.  So in this case, using the lawyer weapon has had much the
same effect as the standard statist weapon ("I know: we'll pass a LAW!
_That_ will stop them!")--that is, no effect at all.

Tim May (who I have certain obvious philosophical differences with) has
been completely consistent on this issue, and his word carries that much
more weight because he's been subjected to Detweiler's most relentless
battering.  THIS is the real world.  Your anarchist principles have just
been put to the test, and you buckled, immediately falling back on a
statist solution.  "Right-wing" anarchists are always bashing liberals and
"P.C." types for being thin-skinned and unable to stand up to harmless
name-calling.  Well, you've shown yourself to be just as thin-skinned.  The
only difference I see is that there's MONEY involved.  So?  Liberals are
wimps for trying to sue you for calling them names, but you're justified in
suing because the name-calling has cost you money?  And all because you're
dealing with straights who can't handle reality?  And meanwhile, YOU'RE the
one who messed up and blew your own cover?  Hmmm...

It's very late, and I'm groggy, so I apologize in advance if any of the
above seems unnecessarily blunt.  It's not intended that way.

   --Dave.

--
Dave Mandl
Planetary Work Machine, Brooklyn Branch
dmandl@panix.com