On 20 Mar 2002 at 9:46, Sunder wrote:
> 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.
