From: aga <aga@dhp.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 06:08:27 -0800 (PST)
To: freedom-knights@jetcafe.org
Subject: Re: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks]
In-Reply-To: <19970119043828.28200.qmail@taz.nceye.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970119090506.7506I-100000@dhp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote:

>    Delivered-To: reece-cpunks@taz.nceye.net
>    Delivered-To: reece@taz.nceye.net
>    Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:13:00 -0600 (CST)
>    Cc: dlv@bwalk.dm.com, cypherpunks@toad.com, freedom-knights@jetcafe.org
>    Reply-To: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov)
>    From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
>    X-No-Archive: yes
>    Organization: Bool Sheet Software
>    X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7]
>    Content-Type: text
>    Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
>    Precedence: bulk
> 
>    Dale Thorn wrote:
>    > 
>    > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
>    > > Someone wrote to me:
>    > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
>    > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
>    > > >people will have to be filtered.
>    > 
>    > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
>    > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
>    > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
>    > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
>    > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
>    > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
>    > 
>    > Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
>    > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
>    > now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
>    > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
>    > 
>    > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
>    > attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
>    > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
>    > is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
>    > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
>    > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
>    > 
>    > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
>    > have two accounts?
>    > 
> 
>    it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article
>    in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain
>    corrections) on these two directories.
> 
>    diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
> 
>    take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation
>    does not screw you up).
> 
>    thats it
> 
> If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with
> timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all
> the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the
> moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
> 

Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right.
And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS
at each location, so you can write some batch programs to
save you the manual wwork.