From: werewolf@io.org (Mark Terka)
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 94 15:34:20 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: CFV on Signing Posts To List?
Message-ID: <FMxskOwscskB075yn@io.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

It seems like we have a pretty good thread on the for/against arguments re:
digitally signing articles posted to the list.

Perhaps we should allow it to run its course over the next 48 hrs, and then
Eric could circulate a form like the following Friday morning (ie Dec 2):

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question:

Do you agree that all articles posted to the list should be digitally signed
and that the keeper of the list should take steps to implement such?

Yes ___
No  ___
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I realize we are not exactly in a democracy here (ie Eric maintains the list)
but then again the participation of the subscribers would be a lot more
enthusiastic if the perception of "majority rules" was met.

As someone mentioned earlier, this discussion seems to pop up every so often
and ramble on for a certain amount of time with nothing being resolved. Maybe
a "Call for the Vote" would change that.

We all would seem to hold the net and its functions to a high degree of
importance. Settling of this issue (as opposed to the thread meandering for
the next month or so) would indicate that something concrete in favour of
crypto could be implemented (or discarded....after suitable discussion) by
its main proponents.





-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBLtu4hK+YbMzawbu5AQE4GAP+LM4gNXDS5O4uzOWTYC4U60veXnjWVjC6
gXxvE/fEJu99SzThgthrf51Jb5K4hKrtJfZ44hwmdyQHsOx+p9xStjkSZFQFWc7b
/J9vEtzwG/IyO/DxD2hHmCzUod64WIx0cXtwUDjUCxgDnAdFaIEjhLfYk5Pr3KaW
e6mkrDiQtSQ=
=S4BI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----