From: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 14:53:34 -0800 (PST)
To: Against Moderation <antimod@nym.alias.net>
Subject: Re: Is Sandy really censoring criticisms of Stronghold, hisproduct?
In-Reply-To: <19970207220720.15530.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <v03007804af2160f848b5@[207.167.93.63]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 10:07 PM +0000 2/7/97, Against Moderation wrote:
>Okay, I went through my old mail, and I'm fairly sure this is the
>message.  I'm convinced it never went to the flames list, and now that
>I've found out I'm on the -unedited list after all, I think it
>probably didn't go to the regular cypherpunks list either.  Can people
>on the various lists confirm this for me?

I checked the archive site (http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks) for the
"main" (censored) list, and do not see it there, either by title or by
author.

I only recently subscribed to the Flames list, so I cannot check to see if
it went there. Anyone else check the Flames list?

As I said in my last messages, if this message went to neither the Main
list nor the Flames list, then a very serious problem has been exposed.

Further, if the post, while not being sent to either of the nominal lists
which filtered stuff is supposed to go to, was used as the basis of legal
threats by the employer of Sandy, the list's censor, then dramatically more
serious implications seem evident. I await Sandy's views with great
anticipation.

The message itself does not look flamish to me. It makes charges, but so do
a zillion other posts. It cannot be the job of a censor to decide on what
is true and what is not true.

>Given the total lack of technical content, the flamey nature of the

It's not "flamey." Nobody is called a cocksucker, nobody is called  a
faggot, etc. Yes, it claims a product has a trojan horse, but this is a
claim comparable to other claims routinely made on list and newsgroups.

I'm also neither stupid nor disingenuous. I realize full well that Vulis
probably made the claim because he knows Sandy works for the seller of
Stronghold. Be that as it may, it is not proper for a censor employed by
the seller of a product to decide that criticisms of his product are
flamish. Would the list have countenanced censorship of criticisms of an
RSADSI product if the list were being censored by an employee of RSADSI?
And by letting Vulis make such a claim, and then having it quickly rebutted
by other employees of C2Net, for example, Vulis would be shown to be
spreading disinformation and his reputation capital would decline still
further.

If in fact the Vulis claim never made it either of the two lists to which
all filtered messages are supposed to be sorted, then deception has
occurred. And a conflict of interest.

Again, I await Sandy's response.

>A lot of people out there are subscribing to the cypherpunks-flames
>and cypherpunks lists thinking that they will see everything that gets
>rejected (albeit with a substantial delay).  If this is not the case,
>it should be made clear.  Otherwise, it's not moderation, but
>dishonesty.

Indeed.

--Tim May

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."