Re: Undermining government power and authority
-- At 04:06 PM 5/4/2001 -0400, Faustine wrote: When I've inadvertently offended people here, I've gone out of my way to show some basic common courtesy and apologize, In most cases I found your apologies at least as offensive as your original insults, and frequently more so. Since you're upset you're not thinking critically enough. Just as I said. You have zero evidence to support your interpretation. You have some kind of issue with me, and rather than talking facts, are foaming at the mouth about my character, intelligence, gender, and so on. How can anyone respect that as a real discussion. You are not capable of a real discussion. You do not know the facts, and you are not interested in finding them out. Nothing you have said makes me wish to have any kind of rational discourse with you. You are neither capable of it, nor interested in it. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 4baHRHhGxFGUI4fkWENAg2waNAr6T07z0rlLJclv 4cR54qyZkjD0mxbnh0FNHi/efsl6VeUznTO7iDwTO - We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ James A. Donald
Re: Undermining government power and authority
Quoting James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED]: James Donald wrote: So all of us are full bore paranoids? Faustine Is that really what you got out of what I said? Yes. You are so persistently catty and insulting that you could not speak without a nasty meaning hidden in your words even if you were discussing the weather. When I've inadvertently offended people here, I've gone out of my way to show some basic common courtesy and apologize, explaining what I meant--what else could I possibly do? Nasty meaning hidden in my words? It's all in your head, you couldn't be more wrong. If a reasonable person read my posts here, I don't think a single one of them would come away thinking I think everyone here is a full-bore paranoid. Since you're upset you're not thinking critically enough. You have zero evidence to support your interpretation. You have some kind of issue with me, and rather than talking facts, are foaming at the mouth about my character, intelligence, gender, and so on. How can anyone respect that as a real discussion. It's embarassing. As for the rest of your message about what I've said or haven't said or the way I said it, people who read the posts will judge for themselves. Several people have already posted their judgments. Sure, there's no reason people can't talk about issues and disagree rationally without getting so thin-skinned they have to lose all sense of proportion and fly off the handle. I wonder how many people think you really accomplished anything wasting time attacking me. What's the point. To paraphrase one of them: Fuck you, and fuck the dog that got your mother pregnant. Well, at least you finally made yourself clear about your position re. the importance of not losing credibility with careless rhetoric and sloppy thinking. Use your filter file. ~Faustine.
Re: Undermining government power and authority
Faustine wrote: Too true. But if we want to actually reach people who *would* care if only they knew, it's important to talk about it without coming across like a full-bore paranoid. It seems like a bad idea to risk losing credibility with careless rhetoric and sloppy thinking. More than that, it's important to keep it straight for your own sake. Sunder repiled: There's only one proper response in the english language to your reply. And that's simply this: Go Fuck Yourself. Ok, fair enough, you want the long winded explanation. Here it is: 1. That's for saying I come across like a full-bore paranoid. I wasn't speaking about you in particular AT ALL. I was making a general point on a tangent related to the stream of conversation: I meant you as in one, a person. Sorry you took it personally, I really didn't mean it that way. James Donald wrote: So all of us are full bore paranoids? Is that really what you got out of what I said? Why did you assume I was referring to everyone--or even anyone in particular--here? In fact, I was so far from assuming you or Sunder or anyone else was going to think I was referring to them personally I didn't even think it was necessary to reassure any of you with a disclaimer. Here and in the other threads too, you're assuming a lot of personal ill-will where it just didn't exist, which is really too bad. As for the rest of your message about what I've said or haven't said or the way I said it, people who read the posts will judge for themselves. But keeping in mind I never meant for you to take anything I said as a personal affront might make a difference to the way you come away from them. ~Faustine.
Re: Undermining government power and authority
-- At 03:00 PM 5/1/2001 -0700, David Honig wrote: The sheeple can be shown arguments they understand, like: if you were evil entity, wouldn't you be motivated to insert privacy affront here. This can alert them. Then they would promptly vote for a government commissar of privacy, to check everyone's logs to make sure that everything that might violate privacy was logged by trustworthy authorities. Since the average vote will make almost no difference, no one will bother to think these things through merely for the sake of casting a sensible vote. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 6GrEYw52OmIbdLwBJff1R0LmRHfDngaSkYrW9P9v 4ALGonVlFKGNHIyHYqfUAI0Ge3qbh9NXyVJMY8Fc7 - We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ James A. Donald
Re: Undermining government power and authority
-- 1. That's for saying I come across like a full-bore paranoid. At 07:22 PM 4/30/2001 -0400, Faustine wrote: I wasn't speaking about you in particular AT ALL. So all of us are full bore paranoids? Your catty insults, incessant put downs, and your patronizing flattery are equally worthless, for they are applied too indiscriminantly. In your ignorance of existing reputations, you insult the wrong people. Your insults reflect upon yourself, rather than those you would patronize. It is common on the internet to grant people with seemingly female names and a feminine writing style some extra slack, and the regulars on this list have displayed remarkable tolerance to your persistent nastiness. I too give extra slack to people who plausibly present as female, perhaps more than most males, but you have exhausted your supply of slack with me, and if you continue in this style you will rapidly exhaust it with everyone. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG nWFl54gJqOxeoykvur0DVhSWfZVa+aLraVLIildq 4dg3Lw5OtKcr1qYVeJYNwVO71VAgj3mvkND86r4DT - We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ James A. Donald
Re: Undermining government power and authority
At 12:11 PM 4/25/01 -0400, John Young wrote: Podesta noted that the 125th anniversary of the gummed-envelope was approaching. That that technology is trusted for privacy because of custom and law backing the custom. He stated that any privacy technology is going to be workable only if backed by law enforcemcent, and, not least custom. He added that the fact that gummed envelopes can be easily opened by intelligence agencies and law enforcement did not bother people. Sub rosa, implied: people with nothing to hide. Yes, by hand. Keyboard bugging black bag jobs can be installed, by hand. By hand, not machine.
