From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 1996 19:35:29 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Compromise proposal
Message-ID: <199611030331.VAA00885@manifold.algebra.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


[this goes to cypherpunks@toad.com and freedom-knights@jetcafe.org. I am
not reading f-k, but I am interested in Dave Hayes's opinion.]

Hi,

I am not normally considered an ally of Dimitri Vulis, so let this
be an attempt at being impartial.

Many members of cypherpunks list are right when they oppose the forced
unsubscription of Dimitri Vulis from this list. The sorry state of this
list is not the result of his flames alone, there is a large number of
people who discuss things of no cryptographic relevance.

We should remember that besides flames and scandals, Vulis has been
posting things that are most relevant to this list's topic.

We should also remember that individuals have the right and
responsibility to define what content they want to see and what content
they do not want to see. I am surprised at libertarians putting
forward propositions that are intended to promote welfare of "new
subscribers" and try to shield them from "lies".

Similarly, individuals are free to create voluntary moderated
associations as they see fit. As it was created, this mailing list was
not a moderated association.

At the same time, unfortunately, flames that Dimitri generated had
rendered previously 80% unusable list to be 99% unusable. These flames
had zero value for me personally. Since cypherpunks is a private list
(although it used to be unmoderated), I can understand the list owner
who wants to save his creature from total destruction.

I propose the following:

	1) The block on Dimitri Vulis's subscriptions should be removed

	2) We should not impose any limitations on anyone's speech except 3)

	3) Dimitri and everyone else should put prefix "[FLAME]" 
           into all Subject: header fields of their flame-related 
	   messages.

	4) The sole discretion of determining what is flame and what 
	   is not should be exercised by John Gilmore. His definition of
	   "flame" can be as broad as reasonably necessary.

	5) John Gilmore should have the right to forsibly unsubscribe, 
	   for a period not exceeding two months, anyone who posts
	   flames and does not use the right prefix.

	6) Cypherpunks list owner shall have the right to install any filters
	   he considers necessary in order to catch and review any messages
	   before they go to all subscribers, solely in order to verify 
	   their compliance with item 3). Messages that do not comply
	   may be rejected and their authors can be unsubscribed, as defined
	   in 5).

This solution will allow anyone with a clue to use appropriate filtering
and improve the signal-noise ratio, and at the same time will not in any
way limit anyone's freedom of speech.

I am also eagerly awaiting when Perry creates a moderated cypherpunks list.

	- Igor.