1996-11-06 - Re: Dr. Vulis is not on cypherpunks any more

Header Data

From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: f5d1454547f31f5f5cbdd7f8883f902f1aa2bf548c11e5e1e27a09a0c4df451c
Message ID: <9m2ywD22w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Reply To: <847122169.8851.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
UTC Datetime: 1996-11-06 12:59:14 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 04:59:14 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 04:59:14 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Dr. Vulis is not on cypherpunks any more
In-Reply-To: <847122169.8851.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <9m2ywD22w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk writes:
>
> You also seem to be implying that people need protecting from
> Dimitri, much the same authoritarian argument we hear from govt.
> about people needing to be protected from porn/drugs/free spech etc.

A very good observation. The 'net needs John Gilmore and Chris Lewis
to protect the newbies from the unsuitable writings of Dr. Dimitri Vulis,
from commercial ads, and from strong crypto in civilian hands. :-)

What do you think about the following conjecture: "cypherpunks" was a
troll, set up to waste the time of the crypto-clueful people who might
otherwise develop good free crypto software.

> > Nor do they have any way of know what an
> > abberation his sort of behavior is on this list.  "So this is
> > what Cypherpunks are like," would be a sad, but understandable
> > misinterpretation of what we're all about.  What John did was
> > appropriate.

It's appropriate for the list owner to do almost anything he likes with his
mailing list: shut it down, unsubscribe people from it, filter out certain
people s/he doesn't like, to cause unsubscription instructions to be appended
to every broadcast article (some lists do that), to cause special disclaimers
to be appended to certain perople's submissions, etc. However subscribing
people to a mailing list without their asking for it has been viewed as
net-abuse for many years, a variant of sending out unsolicited e-mail.

A list owner _often has to unsubscribe addresses that have ceased to exist,
whose former owners hadn't bothered to unsubscribe, and whose e-mail bounces
back to the owner. I think John's actions should be viewed not in the
framework of his propoerty rights (no one argues with those, I hope), but
in terms of his credibility - of which he has none left.

> I understand the point here but I suggest a note at the top of the
> "welcome to cypherpunks" note every new subscriber gets explaining
> who Dimitri is and how to set up their mailer software to block his
> posts.

An excellet suggestion! John certainly has the right to do this on the
mailing list he owns. I also believe that a woman owns her body and
that prostitution should be decriminalized. A whore should have the right
to stand on a streetcorner with a big sign saying "Let me suck your cock
for $10". I have the right to respect her more than John.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





Thread