cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-02-13 - Re: Recommendation: Creation of “alt.cypherpunks”

Header Data

From: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
To: Igor Chudov <ichudov@algebra.com>
Message Hash: 2d1f9e4e299ef3cd3ad785db790bfbb4d886901ebcd5ae7fad7b215e1af85538
Message ID: <3302B2E9.20E3@gte.net>
Reply To: <199702122049.OAA07350@manifold.algebra.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-02-13 06:24:07 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:24:07 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:24:07 -0800 (PST)
To: Igor Chudov <ichudov@algebra.com>
Subject: Re: Recommendation: Creation of "alt.cypherpunks"
In-Reply-To: <199702122049.OAA07350@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <3302B2E9.20E3@gte.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> > "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net> writes:
> > > At 1:20 PM -0600 2/11/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

> > > >If the people decide for creation of a new USENET newsgroup,
> > > >we need to think very hard about actually moving it to a different
> > > >hierarchy from alt.*. I would propose comp.org.cypherpunks,
> > > >comp.cypherpunks, sci.crypt.cypherpunks or something like that.

> It is too late to stop alt.cypherpunks, but if I had to make a
> prediction again, I would predict that soon posters will BEG to help
> them create comp.*.cypherpunks, because of spam and alt.flamage.

I would lean toward sci.crypt.cypherpunks myself.  Are there any
implications in the use of that name as to restrictions, etc.?

Thread