From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 09:56:55 -0800 (PST)
To: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
Subject: Re: FW: Dr. Vulis is not on cypherpunks any more [RANT]
In-Reply-To: <328029BC.559B@gte.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.961106091938.3111C-100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Tue, 5 Nov 1996, Dale Thorn wrote:

> My computer and my access to cypherpunks is not inside of
> anyone's home.

Dale is wrong.  All access to Cypherpunks is via toad.com which 
sits in John Gilmore's home.  (The basement office to be exact.)

> Here, John has opened up whatever computer hardware for an
> essentially public forum...that it is perceived by a very
> large segment of the subscribers as public...

And here John has chosen to limit said forum.  It is irrelevant
how many subscribers perceive the list as public.  It is private.
Their misperception is in no way binding on John.

> Now, don't you think it odd that if people really perceived
> this forum to be "really private", that they would so strongly
> object to this ousting, particularly of the person in question,
> who is not even liked by these objectors?

a) "Against stupidity, the gods themselve, contend in vain."
   Some folks just don't have a clue.  Just because they don't
   understand the nature of John's contribution, does not stop
   them from yammering.

b) There are those who do understand the private nature of the
   list, but think that John has made a mistake.  They may
   certainly try to convince him of the error of his ways without
   assuming the list is public.

> You can argue until doomsday the "privacy of home" issue,...

Since it is correct and unasailable, I believe I will.

> If you really agree with the ousting, I don't understand why
> you're arguing so hard for the "private home" issue; would you
> want to see a world someday where all Internet communications
> are "controlled" by "private" individuals at "home"?

Yes.  That's the way it is now, and I think it works very well.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~