From: Mike Duvos <mpd@netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 06:41:01 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Gilmore's Moderated Cypherpunks List
Message-ID: <199702031441.GAA25301@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Our Former Titular Leader Bails and Expounds Thusly Over the
Smoking Remains of the Once Mighty Cypherpunks List:

 > First, I don't argue that John Gilmore is unfree to do as
 > he wishes with his machine, toad, which has been the major
 > machine host for the Cypherpunks list. John can tell us we
 > have to write in Pig Latin if he wishes.

Freedom of the Press belongs to those who own one. Since there
are no legal restrictions on the name "Cypherpunks", anyone with
a working box can host a "Cypherpunks List", and individuals may
choose to spend their reputation capital improving the S/N ratio
of whatever Cypherpunks Lists they favor.  In this sense, a
"Cypherpunks List" is like a "Webster's Dictionary." Anyone can
use the name, and the deluxe leather bound edition put out by a
University is better than the tacky newsprint one offered as a
premium by your local book club.

Gilmore's Moderated Cypherpunks List is one of many forums where
Cypherpunks may choose to congregate, some of which carry the
name "Cypherpunks," and some of which do not.

 > I think we should all be very grateful to John for agreeing
 > to let it run on his hardware, but not let our gratitude
 > turn into some sort of subservience and blather about how
 > John "owns" the Cypherpunks group.

I think we should have nipped Gilmore in the bud when he censored
Vulis, and immediately looked for a new site to host a
Cypherpunks list which was not subject to sudden and arbitrary
censorship by the site owner.  John, of course, would have been
perfectly free to continue to host "Gilmore's Moderated
Cypherpunks List", and we would have perfectly free not to post
there any more.

Instead, being comfortable and lazy, we tolerated Gilmore's
pathetic attempts to exterminate the pesky Vulis, and given that
Vulis was more than a match for Gilmore mentally, the pissing
contest soon escalated as the frantic Gilmore took more and more
extreme measures to find "the final solution" to the good
Doctor's posts.

Again, predictable behavior by everyone involved.

 > Again, is the "Cyherpunks community" the same as the mailing
 > list? And is the mailing list, hosted at toad, the "property" of
 > John Gilmore?

Of course not.  What a silly notion.

All mailing lists that survive more than a few months are
organized around some strong personality who nudges the list back
on-topic when it begins to stray, and who posts articles
interesting enough that people will make regular visits to read
them.

If no one performs this function on a list, the list will die.

I think most people will agree with me that Timothy C. May has
been the person who performed this function here on Cypherpunks,
from its creation until fairly recently.  If he chooses not to
perform this function on "Gilmore's Moderated Cypherpunks List",
that is Mr. Gilmore's tough luck.  Perhaps if Mr. Gilmore asks
nicely, Dr. Vulis will volunteer.

Then again, perhaps not. :)

 > I'll have more to say about my problems with how things
 > were handled. Frankly, it smacked of the same kind of fait
 > accompli decision John made with the unsubscribing of Vulis.
 > While John had (and has) every legal right to do with his
 > property as he wished, the effect was very negative. First,
 > Vulis found other ways to post (duh). Second, the list was
 > consumed with flames about this, many from Vulis, and many
 > from others. Third, journalists (who love sizzle over
 > substance any day of the week) lept into the fray with
 > articles which gave Vulis the publicity he craved. Fourth,
 > it sent a message to enemies of liberty that "Even the
 > Cypherpunks have found it necessary to abandon their
 > anarchic ways."

I agree completely.  Do real Cypherpunks want to post to a list
run by someone who has undermined their agenda and made them look
like hypocritical idiots to the world?  Gilmore has done more
damage to the good name of Crypto Anarchy in the last few weeks
than the government spooks could ever have hoped for in their
wildest dreams.

 > But by making the _main list_ the censored one, this skewed
 > things considerably.

Yes, this was a sleezy and perfidious trick by Gilmore, who
apparently wanted to transform "Cypherpunks" into "Gilmore's
Moderated Cypherpunks List" by fiat.  Even the unedited list was
an afterthought to pacify critics, and you can be sure that it
will evaporate as soon as he thinks no ones complaints will be
heard.

 > Had there been a debate about the policy, I can think of
 > several approaches I'd like better. But inasmuch as John
 > made it clear that there would be no debate (and, perhaps as
 > part of the "problem," John has not really been a active
 > member of the mailing list, in terms of participating in the
 > debates), this is all moot.

 > In any case, my several years with the list have taken a
 > huge amount of my time. Given the way this whole thing was
 > handled, and the way the list is degenerating even further,
 > it looks like it's good that I'm moving on to other things.

Hey - if John Gilmore can attract readers to "Gilmore's Moderated
Cypherpunks List" by virtue of his charming personality, more
power to him.

Really. :)

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd@netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $