From: LOGOS <logos@c2.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 22:04:53 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Logos here
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.961202220347.2616A-100000@blacklodge.c2.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Sovereign collegues,

     I am Logos. I have adopted this pseudonym to conceal my
'true name'. I want the ideas which I shall be espousing
to stand or fall on their own merits and not on the basis
of biases that my name, sex, ethnicity, etc. might otherwise
elicit. I hope my contributions to this list will be seen as
positive by most list members.
     I intend to limit my postings to only two meta-topics:
decorum and logic. In other words, the way we speak to each
other and the quality of our argumentation.

Decorum

     From time to time, I will 'call' posters on their
intemperate use of rude or provocative language. I believe
Cypherpunks should be a market place of ideas, not a forum
for egos and insults.
     The two houses of the American congress have adopted
rules of decorum. Members may be censored or expelled for
personal attacks and verbal abuse of other members. This
was mandated for a very practical reason. It was realized
that insults, profanity, 'fighting words', etc. could get so
out of hand that they could interfer with the legitimate
work of the congress. While some might say that in the case
of the congress, this would be a good thing, I believe in
the case of Cypherpunks, it is a bad thing.
     I, therefore, call upon each Cypherpunk list members to
personally adopt such a code of conduct for themselves.  If
Democrats can refer to Representative Gingrich as 'my
esteemed collegue' and Republicans can talk about the
'honorable' Ted Kennedy, I see no reason that we cannot
treat Tim May and Dimitry Vilus with similar respect and
courtesy.  What is at stake is far more important than egos.
Cypherpunks defeated Clipper, but of late they have only
defeated themselves.

Logic

     The average reader of this list has sufficient
education and intelligent to understand the most informal
logical falacies. Yet one sees such falacies committed here
with disapointing regularity. I will post definitions of the
most common falacies and will use examples found on this
list as illustrations. If we are to be persuasive among
ourselves and with others, we need to be rigorous in our
thought processes.

I would be honored to hear your thoughts on this post.

Logos out.