From: Blanc Weber <blancw@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 21:41:56 -0800 (PST)
To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: RE: My Departure, Moderation, and "Ownership of the List"
Message-ID: <199702040541.VAA15787@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From:	Vladimir Z. Nuri, in his Ruskie disguise:

hi timmy, a word to the wise: it amuses me that whenever I referred
to a cypherpunk "community" my eyebrows were flamed off, by people
who claimed there was no such thing. a community has certain properties,
many of which I believe the cypherpunks "crowd" has always lacked.
......................................


LD, when you say "community" it means something else than when others
do.  When the cpunks said "community" they meant the camaraderie which
develops in the company of people with similar interests.  When you say
it, it means a group of people stuck to each other by rules of order and
socialization, with boundary lines predetermining the limits of their
arena.

The cpunks had intended that everyone would self-determine the extent or
limits of their interactions, thus arriving at a sense of "community"
from the decision to do so, rather than from being squeezed along
through "proper" channels. 


==
one aspect of the "crowd" that is lacking is LEADERSHIP. I have pointed
this out again and again. the cpunks believe that leadership is no
longer relevant in a digital society, somehow. the list is in the
shape it is in because of POOR LEADERSHIP.. neither you nor EH care
about what LEADERSHIP entails, or wish to exert the sacrifices that
it requires. 
...............................


Typically, people who yell for LEADERSHIP are those who either need it
themselves or are eager to supply it for others - i.e., to determine the
course of events.   Which one of these categories do you yourself fall
into?


==
<<* The proper solution to bad speech is more speech, not censorship.

ah, so everyone should post 5 messages to the list, instead of 1, and
those that are quite should post 3. 
........................................


I would more precisely say that the solution to bad speech is better
speech, thus eliminating the need for 5 messages when 1 will do. YMMV.
Do you think this would hold up in reality?


==
quite an elegant solution. do you
see how the silly rhetoric fails to hold up in reality? when will you
get a clue about where your own views are really leading you? 
................................


You're starting to sound like Ayn Rand. (heh)

   ..
Blanc