From: Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:13:57 -0800 (PST)
To: Igor Chudov <ichudov@algebra.com>
Subject: Privacy/Moderation
In-Reply-To: <199701060239.UAA03419@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <32D0FACE.741B@sk.sympatico.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

> Appendix: what we all received when we subscribed:
> 
> Cypherpunks assume privacy is a good thing and wish there were more
> of it.  Cypherpunks acknowledge that those who want privacy must
> create it for themselves and not expect governments, corporations, or
> other large, faceless organizations to grant them privacy out of
> beneficence.

  Does 'moderation' relate to 'privacy'?
  Could this be amended to say:
 Cypherpunks assume moderation is a good thing and wish there were more
 of it.  Cypherpunks acknowledge that those who want moderation must
 create it for themselves and not expect governments, corporations, or
 other large, faceless organizations to grant them moderation out of
 beneficence.

>  Cypherpunks do not seek to prevent other people from
> speaking about their experiences or their opinions.

  Is this the 'old' policy?

> Cypherpunks love to practice.  They love to play with public key
> cryptography.  They love to play with anonymous and pseudonymous mail
> forwarding and delivery.  They love to play with DC-nets.  They love
> to play with secure communications of all kinds.

  So, if everyone is 'surprised' that somebody has been 'playing'
with the CypherPunks email, then they shouldn't be.

> Cypherpunks know that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down.

  But, Lord knows, they'll try.

Toto