From: frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 22:30:29 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Dr. Vulis
Message-ID: <199611040630.WAA02244@netcom6.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


As I put on my flame resistant suit...

IMHO, most of the posts about John Gilmore's action re: Dr. Vulis are
seriously miss-analyzing what has happened.  As far as I can tell, John
instructed his Majordomo to refuse subscription requests to cypherpunks
from Dr. Vulis.  That is all that John has done.  What John has not done
is:

(1) John has not censored Dr. Vulis.  He is still free to speak to
cypherpunks by posting in the normal manner.

(2) John as not turned to the courts as some others have suggested. 
Turning to the courts would certainly not be the way a cryptoanarchist
would handle the situation.

The best paradigm I can come up with to analyze John's action is my quite
imperfect understanding of communitarian theory.  In essence,
communitarians say that there should be a level of social control between
individual rights and the forceful coercion of the state.  What John has
done is step forward and excommunicate Dr. Vulis.  He has said to Dr.
Vulis, "You are no longer a member of the cypherpunks community."

I would love to hear how people feel this action fits in to the
cryptoanarchy, libertarian utopias we frequently discuss.  E.g. Why is it
not a perfectly reasonable action for some one to take in an anarchy?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | Tired of Dole/Clinton?     | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | Vote 3rd party.  I'm       | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | Voting for Harry Browne    | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA