On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Jim Choate wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Sunder wrote:
> 
> > That's funny, but whose masked faces were on Wired 1.2?  Certainly yours
> > was not one of them.  Claiming that you're doing anything other than
> > running a CDR node (which you piss in) is of course false, which you
> > haven't directly claimed.
> 
> Which has nothing to do with the Wired 1.2. That was [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> not related to the CDR, other than it was created to escape the condition
> of that list after it had degraded to the point of censorship.

Jim: it doesn't matter what address the cypherpunks mailing list runs
out of.  It doesn't matter if it was toad.com in the past and that
happened to be John Gilmore's Toad Hall, listed in DNS as toad.com.  It
doesn't matter if it's cyberpass.net or ssz.com, or lne.com.  

This mailing list (which, yes, is distributed via several locations) is
cypherpunks, and its original goals and charter as were listed on the old
soda.berekely.com machine, and whose goals were quoted in the Wired
article were started by a group of folks which included Eric Hughes and
Tim May.  You weren't around at the time.  You have no claim on this list.

The reason the one at toad.com collapsed was because of another asshole
named Vulis (much like your current self and our current aussie doormat
friend) was pissing in the drinking waters.  Yes, Sandy did seek to manual
filter the list, and there was an unfiltered list as well, and yes, Tim
one of the founders threatened to leave the list, and yes Sandy was
cornered when Vulis posted something about his employer.  All that is
true, and we're all aware of it.  That's not important to this discussion.

What is important: the ideas and topics of this mailing list are the same
as the original one at toad.com.  It's address, is now multi-homed.  
True.  But this is still a mailing list about cryptography, and crypto
anarchy - that is unrestricted cryptography.  It's not a mailing list that
rehashes slashdot posts, The Register Posts, Plan9 punks, or whatever the
fuck the great mythical godlike Jim Choate happens to read today.

> > The string "Choate" is not contained there, though the strings "Hughes",
> > "May", Gilmore are.  Certainly those strings have far greater positive
> > reputaion capital than the "Choate" string.
> 
> That would depend on who one asks.

Certainly.  If we ask the delusional Jim Choate, a legend in his own mind,
I'm sure the answer will differ than 99% of those who frequent here.
 
> I run a CDR node because I'm interested in my community.

And which community is that?  The Cypherpunks?  If so, then you should
respect its goals.  Don't agree with those goals?  Perhaps it isn't your
community.  Perhaps you were mistaken.  Perahps you shouldn't be here.

> > If you are claiming that those who follow the "CACL Theories" (which
> > you've yet to provide any references to other than your own posts) are
> > clueless, then why are you running a list node that is dedicated to their
> > theories? 
> 
> It isn't, though a bunch of you clearly believe that to be the case.

What isn't?  This is cypherpunks.  It was always cypherpunks.  It doesn't
matter than [EMAIL PROTECTED] is gone, or was abandoned.  It doesn't
matter that there are other nodes in the CDR.  The CDR is cypherpunks now,
and the original cypherpunks list has moved to the CDR, and the same
reasons and goals that it originally had moved with it.

> Crypto nor punks requires CACL. It's interesting that the same
> contingent which promotes individual freedom is one of the first groups to
> start promoting censorship...that's funny.

No one other than you claims that Crypto or Punks requires CACL.  No one
other than you uses that term.  No one, not even you, has any idea what
CACL means.  To date, you've not been able to even clearly define what the
goals and theories of CACL are.  But you and only you keep spitting out on
this list like some sort of magical mantra.

So, yes, it's absolutely true that this mailing list is not about CACL
theories.  It's about cryptography.  It's about anarchy, not in the mad
bomber bullshit common interpretation, but about crypto-anarchy - that is
the unrestricted (by governments) use and availability of cryptography and
cryptographic tools.


Your constant wails of "I'm Jim Choate, and I run a CDR, and you don't"
does not excuse your spamming this list with bullshit which no one other
than yourself cares about.  I, and I'm not alone in this, have attempted
repeatedly to get you to correct the way you post news here so that it
would be at least somewhat useful to those who might be interested in it.  

You've constantly ignored this, and fell back on "I'm Jim Choate, I run a
CDR, Waaaaa"

Who gives a fuck?  Any turd with decend bandwith and a few clues about
sendmail, majordomo, and running unix can run a mailing list.  Big fucking
whoop.

Don't give me any bullshit about community.  You're obviously clueless in
its meaning.  

Hint: it's not about what Jim Choate wants.  It's about cypherpunks.  And
that includes crypto, crypto-anarchy, and it does to some extent include
libertarian goals, and capitalist goals.  But only to the extent that the
members of this list have those goals.  I'm sure there may even be
communists and socialists (yourself for example) on this list, who wish to
argue their points of view.  And that's perfectly welcome.

Your constant pointers to slashdot, theregister, unisci, cnn, sciam, time,
yahoonews, osopinion, et al, constant blathering attacks about CACL,
plan-9 fan letters, etc, your attacks on and your lies about Declan, Tim,
and others are NOT welcome.

Don't like it? Your ideals, theories and goals don't match it?  Too
fucking bad.  Move along, tatoo it on your forehead. Whatever the fuck it
takes to get it through your solid titanium cranium.  Just quit the
bullshit.


> But we've been over this ground and you don't get it...sigh.

That's because there's nothing to get other than your complete and
total lack of a clue.

Reply via email to