From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 1996 06:40:20 +0800
To: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
Subject: Re: Cyber-Anarchy
In-Reply-To: <adcaa0e10802100413c3@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <199605252027.NAA26357@netcom7.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



TCM
>My point is actually not so much one of claiming credit for something I've
>been involved with since 1988, as being somewhat critical of the
>all-too-common tendency I see of _renaming_ something without adding any
>new content.

no, you want credit, otherwise you wouldn't care ("cyberanarchy"? how
far is that? in many ways it is more descriptive/accurate for what
is being connoted).  you get credit when people use "your" term, the
etymology you love to wax on occasionally here.

>
>Jim Bell calls his set of ideas "cyber-anarchy," and certain journalists
>have picked up on this (as with the Australian article).
>
>But with the exception of the one variant of anonymous markets, namely,
>"assassination politics," most or all of the other ideas of his
>"cyber-anarchy" seem to be encompassed by the already-existing term.

a pseudo-word that you invented. any pseudo-word is as good as any other.

I think you need to reevaluate your life when you get upset that people
don't use word you invented. for example the term "pseudospoofing"
has many applications to recent news but has never been properly used by 
journalists.  (hee, hee)