From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl8.crl.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:11:27 -0800 (PST)
To: Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
Message-ID: <199701261711.JAA18818@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


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

C'punks,

On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Toto wrote:

>   I think that anyone who thinks that moderation is, or could ever be,
> anything other than a dance into the arms of the establishment, is
> already crazy.

Apparently, Toto does not know very much about John or me or our 
relationships with the "Establishment."  It is who are using a
intellectually dishonest smokescreen of "freedom of speech" in 
order to disrupt and hamper the work of Cypherpunks who are 
dancing into the arms of the "Establishment."
 
>   For the record, I don't think that either John or Sandy is crazy.
> I think that they have their own pre-established goals which others
> on the cypherpunks list are not privy to.

I can't speak for John, but my goals have been stated too often
and too completely for anyone not to know them.  I want us all to
have privacy.  The Cypherpunks list was created to facilitate
discussion--and ultimately action by those who were inclined and 
able to do something to further that goal via the use of
cryptographic and other technologies.  I believe that childish
name-calling and personal attacks interferes with rational 
discourse and a spirit of common purpose and community.  

It is obvious to me that those who are waving the bloody flag of
"censorship" are doing so for either of two reasons.  The ones to
whom I am the most sympathetic are those who simply do not have
a clear and coherent understanding of rights in an anarchistic,
volunteeristic society.  

The ones for whom I have no sympathy are those whose obvious 
goal is disruption of the Cypherpunks list and who are hiding
behind a phoney interpretation of "free speech."

I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the
extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be
run.  I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive
behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they
sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves 
maintain.

This is a voluntary list folks.  We tried incivility and that did
not work.  Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse
in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will.  If most
list members like the change, it will continue.  If not, then we
can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else.  In the
meantime, get over it.  If you really like flames and spam, show
John and me how it really should be done.  Start another list.  
Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot
more than homesteading.


 S a n d y

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