> From: "jon lebkowsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > For the benefit of those of us who might have better things to do than wade > through two years of thrash, could you explain just WHY we wouldn't want to > close the list to non-member submissions? The wisdom of that decision > escapes me, though it's obvious why the list shouldn't be moderated. > > Let me get this straight. You've got better things to do than catch up on basic topics that have been hashed to death and are very well expressed every two months in the archives, yet we don't have anything better to do than personally address your laziness? Am I correctly summarizing your position? Cypherpunks write code. Cypherpunks do research. Cypherpunks do their own homework. At the risk of burning bandwidth on an already well-worn thread, I'll include my announcement from the end of May concerning one of the cypherpunk nodes and how it helps cut down the spam. It's somewhat relevant, and I tend to see fresh subscriptions each time I make a new announcement, so there's some value to me in repeating this. From: Bill O'Hanlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Announcement Approved: CPUNKS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Announcement: In addition to the Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer at [EMAIL PROTECTED], there is now an additional list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This new list will only pass messages that either have CPUNK somewhere in the subject line, or have a header line of Approved: CPUNK. This remailer will not modify any headers. (I think a useful addition might be to have this remailer add the Approved header for people that are subscribed to this remailer, as a convenience. Any comments?) The reason for the two choices on headers is due to the fact that I don't care much for the CDR thing at the beginning of the Subject line myself, so I didn't want to encourage something like it, hence the Approved: option. However, I'm aware that it's hard to add your own headers with certain mail programs, so I'm allowing for it on the Subject: line as well. (Might I suggest adding to the end of the Subject line, rather than the beginning, so that people who sort threads by Subject lines don't have to go to extra trouble?) I imagine that subscribing to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] address will be quite dull if the CPUNK cookie doesn't catch on. If the group consensus is that a different approach would be better, I'm adaptable. I thought it might cut short some of the debate if we had a working example, (assuming my procmail recipe works, of course!) Both lists can be subscribed to by sending "subscribe cypherpunks" or "subscribe cypherpunks2" in the body of the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Bill -- Bill O'Hanlon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professional Network Services, Inc. 612-379-3958
