From: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 09:51:53 -0800 (PST)
To: John Young <rah@shipwright.com>
Subject: Re: The Offending Stronghold posts...
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970217170243.006f6ab4@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <v03007800af2e48c1dc67@[207.167.93.63]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 12:02 PM -0500 2/17/97, John Young wrote:

>Return-Path: cypherpunks-errors@toad.com
>X-Sender: jya@pop.pipeline.com
>Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 13:17:32 -0500
>To: cypherpunks@toad.com
>From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
>Subject: Who's Censoring Who?
>Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
>
>Sandy's e-mailed several of us who've sent messages about Vulis's
>ploy to put Sandy in a conflict-of-interest bind -- a well-known attack
>on moderators of all kinds, not just on the net.

Interestingly, I don't recall getting any e-mail from Sandy telling me he
was not passing on my messages to either the Main or the Flames list...my
messages were simply dropped on the floor. (Others, including John, have
said they sometimes got nice Sandygrams explaining why their items were
deemed unsuitable for either of the lists. Sandy may have considered it
pointless to send me an explanation....)


>It's probably worth saving accusations of censorship for the real thing,
>after trial usage here for what is truly nasty high-stakes global info-war
>gaming.

As John likes literary references, recall William Burroughs' warning about
"the policeman inside."

I can't share John's belief that we should ignore censorship on the CP list
(especially messages going to neither of the two specified lists, without
notice). Waiting "for the real thing" is not a clear-cut issue, as explicit
censorship of political views is not likely to happen in our lifetimes in
the U.S.

However, "self-censorship," a la the V-chip, the mandatory voluntary
labeling of CDs, etc., is becoming the favored route. And the use of  the
legal system, or threats to use the legal system (a la threats made to
Vulis, Against Moderation, etc.) is part of the bullying pulpit (this pun
inspired by John's flights of rhetorical fancy).

>[Note: Thorn, "cuckoo" and TCM responded to this; none were forwarded
>to the cp-edited list, AFIK.]

One of the interesting, and utterly predictable, consequences of "silent
suppression" of some messages is that those on the unedited list, who see
all traffic (for the nonce), get to engage in conversations which are
subsequently suppressed so that several of us are having a conversation the
main list (and the flames list) are oblivious to!

This has had the fascinating effect of having people outside the
conversation (as an example, Blanc Weber) gradually figuring out from
"approved" messages that something is going on behind the scenes...they
they send us messages (as Blanc did) asking what the hell is going on, what
we're obliquely referring to. When the excised material is forwarded to
them (as I did with Blanc), the reaction is often "Wow! I didn't know."

As conversational threads are often so tangled, and become so much more
tangled with time, the job of the censor gets more difficult as time
passes. Not only must he excise all mention of banned topics, he must also
be alert to later discussions making mention of the act of banning, or of
the topics. This is territory well-covered by Orwell, of course. The
rewriting of history is a full-time job.

--Winston Smith


Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."