a desperate plea

please do not fill my mailbox with argument in the form `criminal
behavior [y] exists or is widespread, therefore similar practice [x] is ok'

please do not say `forgeries are hard to prevent, therefore no one
should even attempt it'

please do not say `the only systems for identity tracking amount to
government oppression'

please do not talk about some depraved person with multiple personality
disorder as a way of describing Utopia.

most of all, do not pollute the Constitution with your lies:

>The freedom to communicate in any way whatsoever, including
>"pseudospoofing", is a Constitutional guarantee and part of the
>foundation of this society.  

the Constitution specifically prohibits `high treason'. Or are we now
against the Constitution? It's hard to keep track lately.

[Pseudospoofing]
>This is a fundemental paradigm shift that you have not made yet.  It is one
>that few have.  If anything, it is shared conceptual memes such as this
>subject of identity in a world without substance that is the true
>cypherpunk cause.  

oh, what depravity and moral blackness. Evil promoted as `a fundamental
paradigm shift', a `conceptual meme'. Helleluja.

many cypherpunks have so utterly deluded themselves, they believe they
have invented a new kind of society that is completely free of
accountability, while they leech the fruits of one where that
accountability was hard-won by many sacrifices of our forefathers. I
urge you to live in your `society'. You will get the chance, I assure
you! `actions have consequences, even in cypherspace.' 

* * *

Let me ask a question of the `cypherpunks' opposed to identity tracking
in any form. A major aspect of catching vicious criminals is being able
to link up their multiple crimes. It is absolutely essential for
crimefighting. I could point to some examples using credit scams or
drug dealing or whatever, but the hard core Cypherpunks would probably
just grin with evil pleasure. So--

An excellent case is Ted Bundy. Ted Bundy would be the Cypherpunk
Poster Boy for Pseudospoofing. `Medusa' is correct in saying our new
societies allow and encourage this kind of anonymity. He slipped and
danced between cities and murdered young women in the most grisly and
heinous fashions. He lied at *every* stage of the way, perhaps even at
the end when he blamed his utter depravity on exposure to pornography.

Part of the difficulty in catching him in the end was his total mastery
of the techniques that have a striking similarity to what the
Cypherpunks promote -- hidden credit, deception, disguise,
impersonation, etc. He was a man who was so treacherous, he would truly
not `stop at anything'. I'm sure he weaved such a majestic and
convoluted `web of lies,' PRZ & the Cypherpunks would be proud. In the
end, one of the final critical incriminating pieces of evidence used in
court to convict him, and prevent further murders, was the bite marks
he had savagely embedded in the buttocks of one of his victims, which
matched his own jaw. It took something like 4 police to hold him down
to make the cast, he squirmed and writhed with such force and desperation.

Cypherpunks, look at yourselves in the mirror. See what you are
becoming and promoting. Look at the logical extent of your ideas. Could
*any* society truly function without any identity or accountability
whatsoever? The cypherpunk `agenda' has become so closely
indistinguishable with raw criminality and evil it horrifies me. Oh,
how it nauseates me. Perhaps many of you will fill my mailbox with new
letters defending Ted Bundy and asserting that the only problem was
that he didn't `spawn' a new set of teeth. Perhaps you look forward to
the day you can spawn some of your own Ted Bundys, and be so clever
you'd *never* be caught. Perhaps you already have the young lady
victims in mind. The ones that betrayed you by thinking you were too
strange too date, huh? Perhaps the only problem was that these young
ladies are just too damn *trusting*?

`that which cannot be enforced should not be prohibited'. Like murder?

* * *

Another question for all the bastard apologists and moral relativists.
Are you fundamentally opposed to me having the choice of screening
phantom identities in my personal mailbox? Many of your arguments
suggest that not only do you wish to make sure you can be anonymous,
but you wish to ensure that other people must support and sponsor your
anonymity. As for screening, very soon these capabilities will probably
exist, based on birth certificate databases etc. that are accessable
over the internet. Oh, my kingdom for this capability.

But you will infect and poison these databases with your forgeries and
lies, won't you? That is the fundamental cypherpunk agenda: wherever
accountability or identity is in place, do everything possible to
*evade* and *sabotage* it. Not only should there be *passive*
anonymity, but there should also be *active* deception. You not only
want to swing your fist, you want to batter my face -- with a phantom
bludgeon. I'll never know what hit me! Oh, what utter joy! To not only
be evil, but to get away with it! You hate Democracy and
`egalitarianism' not because they are unfair, but because they are the
closest thing to honesty and fairness we humans have ever discovered,
and in them *you* would *lose*, because the `perverted majority' of
society is *not* in favor of being murdered and raped without consequence.

And you will tear and wreck those fragile developing efforts and
schemes for identification and accountability, no matter how basic or
feeble, with the most insidious treachery. You will subscribe to the
mailing lists where the development is going on, you will infiltrate
the development groups, you will assault the honest, polite, and
courteous ladies and gentlemen with poisonous and acidic email and
posts, you will twist your knife into the baby in the crib, and you
will stick dynamite sticks up the nostrils of anyone who says, `well,
gosh, guys, just hold on a minute here!' ...

Oh, how you are thriving on the Internet. Either the parasite or the
host will die soon, of at least that I am sure. I pray to God that
Cyberspace survives.


P.S. Ask all your revered fiction authors like Gibson and Sterling
et.al. what they would think of your grotesque perversions. Be sure to
explain it in *your* terms of `true and pure anonymity.' `a fundamental
paradigm shift? sure, sounds great! right out of one of my own stories.'

L. Detweiler writes:
> most of all, do not pollute the Constitution with your lies:

  I assume you also support the right to keep and bear arms. Good, cause
I'm coming over to put you out of your misery. You're like a horse with
a brain disease, I request that you be "shot" and removed from this list, or
prevented from posting.
 
> >The freedom to communicate in any way whatsoever, including
> >"pseudospoofing", is a Constitutional guarantee and part of the
> >foundation of this society.  
> 
> the Constitution specifically prohibits `high treason'. Or are we now
> against the Constitution? It's hard to keep track lately.

  No Treason sayeth Lysander Spooner.

[more idiotic ramblings of LD deleted]
> Part of the difficulty in catching him in the end was his total mastery
> of the techniques that have a striking similarity to what the
> Cypherpunks promote -- hidden credit, deception, disguise,
> impersonation, etc. He was a man who was so treacherous, he would truly
> not `stop at anything'. I'm sure he weaved such a majestic and
> convoluted `web of lies,' PRZ & the Cypherpunks would be proud. In the

   And he did it all without computers. Without cryptography. What your pea
brain fails to understand is that you can't solve social problems with
computers. It's like trying to ban guns to prevent crime, IT WON'T WORK.
Why should we all suffer because a few people will use cryptography and
anonymous remailers for evil deeds? Got that? Whatever Draconian measures
you implement to achieve your dreams of absolute accountability, they
simply WILL NOT WORK. Someone will find a way to circumvent them and commit
crimes. You're own real life example of a killer proves it.

> Another question for all the bastard apologists and moral relativists.
> Are you fundamentally opposed to me having the choice of screening

  No, get some better mail software then. Or write some damn code for
a change and stop ranting.

[more ranting deleted. I now see that my original assessment of
Detweiler after his "electronic democracy" was correct. Nothing but another
idealistic believer in the great society.]

> P.S. Ask all your revered fiction authors like Gibson and Sterling
> et.al. what they would think of your grotesque perversions. Be sure to
> explain it in *your* terms of `true and pure anonymity.' `a fundamental
> paradigm shift? sure, sounds great! right out of one of my own stories.'

  Methinks you've confused cypherpunks and CYBERPUNKS. Gibson and Sterling
couldn't rub 2-bits together if their life depended on it. Gibson
probably couldn't solve a linear algebraic equation either. Why should we
revere them? (especially since they are a rip-off of Vinge. True Names
and Fire Upon the Deep convey "internet" like sci-fi much better)


  I think it's time to check into a mental hospital, you're losing it.


-- Ray Cromwell        |    Engineering is the implementation of science;    --
-- EE/Math Student     |       politics is the implementation of faith.      --
-- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu  |                         - Zetetic Commentaries      --

> I assume you also support the right to keep and bear arms. Good, cause
>I'm coming over to put you out of your misery. You're like a horse with
>a brain disease, I request that you be "shot" and removed from this list, or
>prevented from posting.
 
you're really upsetting me with your references to firearms and veiled
threats. this is way uncool. please chill out.

At least you seem to understand, `death is the ultimate form of censorship.'

>Whatever Draconian measures
>you implement to achieve your dreams of absolute accountability, they
>simply WILL NOT WORK. Someone will find a way to circumvent them and commit
>crimes. You're own real life example of a killer proves it.

another argument, existence of criminal behavior [x] supports
perversion [y] or lack of total perfection implies lack of necessity. I
think I will name these Cromwell Arguments.

no YOU don't get it. `we' do NOT have to implement DRACONIAN MEASURES
to find some BENEFIT from IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS. no system is
FOOLPROOF and many will be SABOTAGED by CRIMINALS but are ultimately
still SOCIALLY USEFUL AND DESIRABLE.

[Gibson, Sterling]
>Why should we
>revere them? (especially since they are a rip-off of Vinge. True Names
>and Fire Upon the Deep convey "internet" like sci-fi much better)

oh, so you're now criticizing them. well, why don't you ask Mr. Vinge
what he thinks of your perversions like `pseudospoofing'? I'm waiting
at the edge of my keyboard. Please quote me relevant passages. Show how
the Liberation of the Universe is attained with it. Make inferences to
current reality from Dystopian Science Fiction. Show how nothing but
systematic deception and lies will lead to any functional system other
than barbarianism!

>  I think it's time to check into a mental hospital, you're losing it.

yes, because I am willing to attack the #1 Cypherpunk cause,
PSEUDOSPOOFING IS SACRED, (which took me the better part of a year to
discover in all the obfuscation and brainwashing in black posts), I
should be consigned to an asylum for my thought crimes.

I now know what a thought crime is! And I know who has committed many!

L. Detweiler writes:
> you're really upsetting me with your references to firearms and veiled
> threats. this is way uncool. please chill out.

  This is why I think you need psychological help. Either you're a 
hypersensitive wimp, or you've got no life outside the net. Use your
intelligence: I am sitting at a terminal a thousand miles away and
I jokingly refer to shooting you and you become emotionally upset.
No one else is as obsessed with pseudospoofing as you simply because 
speech over the net doesn't have so much an impact on us as they seem
to you.

  I'm coming to kill your family tommorow with a rusty razor.

> >Whatever Draconian measures
> >you implement to achieve your dreams of absolute accountability, they
> >simply WILL NOT WORK. Someone will find a way to circumvent them and commit
> >crimes. You're own real life example of a killer proves it.
> 
> another argument, existence of criminal behavior [x] supports
> perversion [y] or lack of total perfection implies lack of necessity. I
> think I will name these Cromwell Arguments.
> 
> no YOU don't get it. `we' do NOT have to implement DRACONIAN MEASURES
> to find some BENEFIT from IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS. no system is
> FOOLPROOF and many will be SABOTAGED by CRIMINALS but are ultimately
> still SOCIALLY USEFUL AND DESIRABLE.

  So? If the majority of people will use pseudonyms honestly, why should
they be punished for the few who are malicious?

  The same arguments you make against multiple-nyms are the very same
arguments that can be made against strong crypto and for CLIPPER. Clipper
isn't Draconian either and can argubly benefit society by making it easier
for the FBI to catch criminals. What's your idealogical opposition to it
then?

  I dare you to present your "identification system" I want to see the
specifications on how it will work, and how you can oppose nyms and
reject clipper/skipjack and maintain a consistent philosophy. I don't
think you know what the hell you are talking about except for some
vague utopian ideals you have. Come on, where are those algorithms?
 
> [Gibson, Sterling]
> >Why should we
> >revere them? (especially since they are a rip-off of Vinge. True Names
> >and Fire Upon the Deep convey "internet" like sci-fi much better)
> 
> oh, so you're now criticizing them. well, why don't you ask Mr. Vinge
> what he thinks of your perversions like `pseudospoofing'? I'm waiting
> at the edge of my keyboard. Please quote me relevant passages. Show how
> the Liberation of the Universe is attained with it. Make inferences to
> current reality from Dystopian Science Fiction. Show how nothing but
> systematic deception and lies will lead to any functional system other
> than barbarianism!

  Why do you think I am concerned with the liberation of the universe?
Actually, I'm concerned with MY liberation. Why do you believe that
I care what any fiction author thinks? I make my own decisions and
my own opinions and I don't care what Vinge thinks. I like his
books, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with his real life philosophy.
You're yet another leftist wacko who thinks you can prove theories
through fictional story book worlds. Next you're be telling us that
Bladerunner is proof of why we shouldn't progress with Biotechnology.

> >  I think it's time to check into a mental hospital, you're losing it.
> yes, because I am willing to attack the #1 Cypherpunk cause,
> PSEUDOSPOOFING IS SACRED, (which took me the better part of a year to
> discover in all the obfuscation and brainwashing in black posts), I
> should be consigned to an asylum for my thought crimes.

  If it took you a year and you still got it wrong, I think you should
be consigned to elementary school. You're obviously a product of our
EVIL and TREACHEROUS public school system screwups.
 
-Ray

p.s. you're dead, I'm gunning for you now baby!


-- Ray Cromwell        |    Engineering is the implementation of science;    --
-- EE/Math Student     |       politics is the implementation of faith.      --
-- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu  |                         - Zetetic Commentaries      --

According to rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu:
> 
> L. Detweiler writes:
> > you're really upsetting me with your references to firearms and veiled
> > threats. this is way uncool. please chill out.
> 
>   This is why I think you need psychological help. Either you're a 
> hypersensitive wimp, or you've got no life outside the net. Use your
> intelligence: I am sitting at a terminal a thousand miles away and
> I jokingly refer to shooting you and you become emotionally upset.
> No one else is as obsessed with pseudospoofing as you simply because 
> speech over the net doesn't have so much an impact on us as they seem
> to you.

I don't blame him at all.

>   I'm coming to kill your family tommorow with a rusty razor.

This is a bit tasteless, don't you think.  Come on, grow up.



J. Michael Diehl   ;^)  |*The 2nd Amendment is there in case the 
mdiehl@triton.unm.edu   | Government forgets about the 1st!  <RL>
Mike.Diehl@f29.n301.z1  |*God is a good Physicist, and an even 
    .fidonet.org        | better Mathematician.  <Me>
al945@cwns9.ins.cwru.edu|*I'm just looking for the opportunity to 
 (505) 299-2282 (voice) | be Politically Incorrect! <Me>
Can we impeach him yet? |*Protected by 18 USC 2511 and 18 USC 2703.

J. Michael Diehl writes:
> According to rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu:
> >   I'm coming to kill your family tommorow with a rusty razor.
> 
> This is a bit tasteless, don't you think.  Come on, grow up.

   That was sort of an inside joke directed at Perry. (it's the motd
of the Extropian's mail server) However, if it sapped any of LD's bodily
fluids, I'm happy. I'd have to be, since I'm an evil, treasonous
Benedict Arnold of cypherpunks who should be hung by the neck or deported
off the net.


-- Ray Cromwell        |    Engineering is the implementation of science;    --
-- EE/Math Student     |       politics is the implementation of faith.      --
-- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu  |                         - Zetetic Commentaries      --

Over on ASAR, we give warning for anger. Consider yourself warned.

















In article <9310260646.AA04776@kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu>,
 <rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu> wrote:
:   I'm coming to kill your family tommorow with a rusty razor.

I despise Detweiler. I also think he ought to be in a mental
hospital. However, this is evil, anti-social behavior. It is
abusive beyond any possibility of shrugging it off.

Stop it. Don't make excuses. I don't *care* if you think this
sort of think is "just a joke". It isn't. OK, you don't
understand. That's irrelevant. Just take it from older and wiser
heads that it is unacceptable. STOP IT.

No, I'll make it stronger. Either you apologize to me, to
Detweiler, and to the list, or the list owner removes you from
the list, or I go. I will not be associated with a group that
tolerates this sort of behavior.

(Does anyone want to know why I'm so incensed. Check out ASAR for
awhile. Understand that this person's behavior, and excuse
making, is indistinguishable from the abuse that makes that
newsgroup necessary.)

T. William Wells writes:
> 
> Over on ASAR, we give warning for anger. Consider yourself warned.
   Vapor. Or else?

> In article <9310260646.AA04776@kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu>,
>  <rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu> wrote:
> :   I'm coming to kill your family tommorow with a rusty razor.
> 
> I despise Detweiler. I also think he ought to be in a mental
> hospital. However, this is evil, anti-social behavior. It is
> abusive beyond any possibility of shrugging it off.

   In context it was obviously a joke, lighten up. I think LD/Sboxx
deserve what they get for coming onto a forum about cryptography
and accusing people of high treason, evil, poison, etc in an almost
religious fervor.

> No, I'll make it stronger. Either you apologize to me, to
> Detweiler, and to the list, or the list owner removes you from
> the list, or I go. I will not be associated with a group that
> tolerates this sort of behavior.

   I guess I will have to be kicked off the list then, or you will have
to unsubscribe because I have no intention of apologizing to you or Detweiler.
I don't apologize for the "evil, anti-social" joke I made either, but I
do apologize for wasting bandwidth on the list if that's any consolation.
I'm getting to the point where I can't keep put with the amount of mail
in my box anyway. The ball's in your court.

> (Does anyone want to know why I'm so incensed. Check out ASAR for
> awhile. Understand that this person's behavior, and excuse
> making, is indistinguishable from the abuse that makes that
> newsgroup necessary.)

  That's the funniest thing I've heard all week. Comparing a joke, "I'm gonna
kill your family with a rusty razor", made over the net, with rape? Even
it they were equivalent, I'm not about to walk on eggshells because some
people on the internet can't differentiate between a virtual joke and a
real life threat. Perhaps that's the biggest problem in the world today, just
last week a bunch of jocks repeated a scene from _The Program_ and laid
down in the middle of the high way. 

  If you want to prevent net.abuse, I suggest you take a look at alt.flame
or alt.tasteless and issue a couple thousand of your "warnings."

-- Ray Cromwell        |    Engineering is the implementation of science;    --
-- EE/Math Student     |       politics is the implementation of faith.      --
-- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu  |                         - Zetetic Commentaries      --

Sigh. This is totally off topic. Or is it? Cyberspace is going to
*have* to deal with those entities that are biologically of the
human race but who are mentally of less value than a laboratory
rat.....so, folks, are we going to deal with this or are we going
to just have a nice slanging match with no valuable outcome?

In article <9310270359.AA08275@kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu>,
 <rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu> wrote:
:    In context it was obviously a joke, lighten up.

You are lying. You wrote that for the explicit purpose of causing
pain. Your *obvious* intent was to say something upsetting and
angering. So don't give me any of this nonsense about a joke. You
are nothing but an insensitive, immature bully and you do not
deserve to be among this group.

T. William Wells says:
>  <rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu> wrote:
> :    In context it was obviously a joke, lighten up.
> 
> You are lying. You wrote that for the explicit purpose of causing
> pain. Your *obvious* intent was to say something upsetting and
> angering. So don't give me any of this nonsense about a joke. You
> are nothing but an insensitive, immature bully and you do not
> deserve to be among this group.

So he intended to cause pain? Big deal. I'm beginning to believe the
book "I'm Disfunctional, You're Disfunctional": it concludes that
people involved in the recovery movement are generally doing the
opposite.

I'm the sort of guy who gets flamed constantly. I've been called the
worst possible things. Hasn't hurt me or crippled me. Calling people
names is stupid, but individuals who can't take being called names are
emotional cripples.

Perry

a conscious being, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
> 
> T. William Wells says:
> >  <rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu> wrote:
> > :    In context it was obviously a joke, lighten up.
> > 
> > You are lying. You wrote that for the explicit purpose of causing
> > pain. Your *obvious* intent was to say something upsetting and

> So he intended to cause pain? Big deal. I'm beginning to believe the
> book "I'm Disfunctional, You're Disfunctional": it concludes that
> people involved in the recovery movement are generally doing the
> opposite.
> 
> I'm the sort of guy who gets flamed constantly. I've been called the
> worst possible things. Hasn't hurt me or crippled me. Calling people
> names is stupid, but individuals who can't take being called names are
> emotional cripples.

Perry is very right here, imho. If Ray was your wife or a co-worker,
or in someway had a formal relationship with you it might be an
issue. 1) I think it was a joke, but 2) Even if it wasn't you are
letting him push your "buttons." 


-- 
Harry S. Hawk  				      habs@extropy.org
Electronic Communications Officer, Extropy Institute Inc. 
    	    The Extropians Mailing List, Since 1991
EXTROPY -- A measure of intelligence, information, energy, vitality,
experience, diversity, opportunity, and growth.  EXTROPIANISM -- The
philosophy that seeks to increase extropy.

: (Does anyone want to know why I'm so incensed. Check out ASAR for
: awhile. Understand that this person's behavior, and excuse
: making, is indistinguishable from the abuse that makes that
: newsgroup necessary.)

ASAR stands for "alt.sexual.abuse.recovery", a newsgroup I run an
anonymous server for. This group actually has survivors of all
sorts of abuse, including the verbal abuse that rjc perpetrated.

T. William Wells says:
> : (Does anyone want to know why I'm so incensed. Check out ASAR for
> : awhile. Understand that this person's behavior, and excuse
> : making, is indistinguishable from the abuse that makes that
> : newsgroup necessary.)
> 
> ASAR stands for "alt.sexual.abuse.recovery", a newsgroup I run an
> anonymous server for. This group actually has survivors of all
> sorts of abuse, including the verbal abuse that rjc perpetrated.

Ray was being silly and I don't think his message was productive, but
anyone who cannot deal with someone making a silly and obviously
not-to-be-acted-upon threat is likely to crumple the first time a car
honks at them. I would suggest that such individuals are not the ones
we build society around -- were we to try to do so, almost all human
activity would have to cease. Out in the world there exist people who
are so damaged that the sight of a knife makes them go into a fit.
(The technical name for this condition is balenophobia I belive,
although I am almost sure I have the spelling wrong). We have not as a
society decided to eat with chopsticks to keep such people from being
confronted with things that scare them.


Perry

rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu [ note: that's someone different from me ] writes:
 >   I'm coming to kill your family tommorow with a rusty razor.

I wonder if Mr. Godwin will consider explaining whether making
"threats" like the above, serious or not, can possibly result in a
period of less-than-pleasant interactions between the author and the
FBI.  (I'm honestly curious; I really have no idea whether the answer
is "yes" or "no".)

If Mr. Detweiler were the President, then I would advise "rjc" to
rapidly locate a lawyer...

--
Mike McNally

Mike McNally writes:

> I wonder if Mr. Godwin will consider explaining whether making
> "threats" like the above, serious or not, can possibly result in a
> period of less-than-pleasant interactions between the author and the
> FBI.  (I'm honestly curious; I really have no idea whether the answer
> is "yes" or "no".)

It's more likely that it would draw the attention of state and/or local
law enforcement: most states have laws against "terroristic threats."
Whether the comment qualifies as a genuine terroristic threat is open to
question. (Why threaten with a rusty razor? True terrorists keep their
tools sharp.)


--Mike

"L. Detweiler" says:
> please do not fill my mailbox with[...]
> please do not say [...]
> please do not say [...]
> please do not talk about[...]

Why don't you go away? You are filling OUR mailboxes with junk.

Perry