From: Dave Hayes <dave@kachina.jetcafe.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 1996 14:49:58 -0800 (PST)
To: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov)
Subject: Re: Compromise proposal
Message-ID: <199611042249.OAA22414@kachina.jetcafe.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> [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.]

What weight can my opinion possibly have? This list is apparently
owned by a Mr. John Gilmore. If he's being censorous, that's bad,
but it is apparently within his means to execute said censorship.

> 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.

Not to speak for the cypherpunks (we all know their reputation) but I 
should think the cypherpunks are savvy enough to know the subjectivity
of the term "on-topic". 

> 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.

Gee. What a great idea. 

> 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.

Improving signal to noise is a laughable goal at a social event of
more than 100 people, why do people insist upon trying it on the net?
------
Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org 
Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet

Be wary of strong drink.  It can make you shoot at tax collectors and miss