From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 23:49:29 +0800
To: Mark Aldrich <maldrich@grctechs.va.grci.com>
Subject: Re: InfoWarCon V 1996: Call For Papers
Message-ID: <m0tymPJ-0008xYC@pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 09:29 AM 3/18/96 -0500, Mark Aldrich wrote:

>I personally know Winn and several of the folks from NCSA.  You're stuff 
>would be a FANTASTIC contribution, and I'm certain that it would be a 
>popular session.  Yes, some of these folks are a bit "establishment," but 
>they go to these things looking for new ideas, new perspectives, etc.

Well, I've forwarded the essay as is.  If they really insist, I'd cut it 
down to a 1-2 page summary, but I suspect that if it catches their attention 
they won't mind reading the extra material.  

>You sound like a guy who can hold his own in a debate, so I imagine 
>you'll have no problems dealing with this crowd.  They may "challenge" 
>your views, but you're not going to get attacked or anything.

You're probably right, but some of the more perceptive ones may shit bricks 
when they discover what the stakes really are.  The REALLY perceptive ones 
will know that it doesn't make any difference, whether or not they like the 
idea or me, it's on the way.


>Don't read too much into this.  Last year, we had Eric Bloodaxe (Chris G) 
>there, a host of, uh, shall we say "fringe" elements, and I think Eric 
>Hughes was there (?Eric?  Sarah and I *think* we saw you there?), as well.
>As far as an "agenda" other than the published one, I think you're probably 
>being overly concerned.  It's actually a fun con and you'd be surprised 
>the number of people willing to actively listen to anyone they even think 
>might remotely be a "hacker."
>
>If you show up trying to "one up" folks, however, you may not get what you 
>want.  It's more of a cooperative, interactive forum;  Not a competition.

It's not that I'm trying to "one up" them; it might happen automatically.  
Let me give you a real-life example:  I first published the essay on 
FIDOnet, as well as list called "Digitaliberty," run by Bill Frezza.  
Frezza's list paradigm was to develop a way to enable the net to stay free 
in an unfree world; my idea had the prospect of not only making/keeping the 
net free, but also dragging the rest of the world into freedom whether it 
liked it or not.  (As well as eliminating war, governments, and a few other 
minor details.)   A few weeks after I started publicizing AP, the list went 
down for a few days and when it eventually returned, I was not among the 
subscribers and Frezza studiously ignored my inquiries.

As you can well imagine, Frezza's original idea was good, it was merely too 
limited and was overtaken by progress.  It would have been easier for him if 
he had opposed the fundamental concept of net freedom, or believed my 
position to be impractical or technically flawed.  As it was, there was 
nothing he could do.

Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com