Re: New mailing list?

I was thinking about Alan's proposal for a moderated real-world-crypto
list (which sounds good, by the way!), and it brought up my main problem
with cypherpunks, which is sheer volume, volume, volume!

It's not a "noise" problem -- since the end of the LD foolishness the
greatest part of what has been posted here has been intelligent, thoughtful
stuff.  But since c'punks has grown to the size of a newsgroup in volume,
simply getting through it is *difficult*.  

My proposal is pretty simple: splitting the list into cypherpunks-tech
and cypherpunks-policy.  (Cypherpunks-announce would be left alone of
course.)  I think a large number of readers would want to be on both
lists, but a large number (like myself) would *not*, and if nothing else,
it would cut down the mailer load on toad.  

In short, technical crypto articles, reviews of papers, steganography
stuff, PGP-specific stuff, all source code, etc., would go to the
cypherpunks-tech list; while policy articles, Clipper stuff, political
discussions, anarcholibertarian/extropian material, social
implications of digital cash, etc., would go to the cypherpunks-policy
list.  I *know* there are people out there who would rather that
the political stuff not get in the way of their technical discussions,
and then there are people like me who are more focused on the policy
issues (and regardless of technical background, are never going to be
code-level crypto hacks).

Comments?

--
Michael C. Berch
mcb@net.bio.net / mcb@postmodern.com

No offense, Michael, but you've made a Frequently Offered Suggestion.
I really should put the answer in a cron job.  The mailing list won't
be split.

>My proposal is pretty simple: splitting the list into cypherpunks-tech
>and cypherpunks-policy.  

This proposal has been put forward before.  No doubt it will be put
forward again.  But it's not going to happen.  I sound cranky, I know.

Let's be explicit.  The list is not going to be split because I don't
want it to be split.  By my fiat.  It's not fair and it's not
democratic and it's not going to change.

Cypherpunks is where the politics meets the code.  It is the interplay
between software design and political desire which is where the all
the good stuff happens.  Policy separated from development lags the
reality of deployment, and necessarily.  There's already a newsgroup
for this: talk.politics.crypto.  Technicality separated from sociality
is unaware and harbors deep-seated contradictions.  There's already a
newsgroup for this: sci.crypt.

Programmers implement culture, and cypherpunks write code.

I want each reader of these words to reflect on the phrase
"implementing culture".  If you do not realize the magnitude of this
principle and have some respect for its enormity, I would sincerely
suggest that your time would be better spent reading some political
philosophy and some technological history and pondering over your
desires, to make sure that you know them.

Eric

I agree completely.  I've been kind of lurking since I joined the list, 
mainly because I don't know much technical cryptography, and have been 
here mainly to learn more.  This list traffic is starting to get to be 
just too much.  (65 new messages today)

/|NGeL of |>eATH
21 keystrokes south of Seattle (on a clear day)
Finger me for my PGP 2.3a public key.
Have you terrorized a Republican today?