Re: Extropian Justice

Tim writes:
> Most of my comments will be based on the material Ram Cromwell writes:
> 
> >    First let me explain something to people who don't know. The extropians
> > list has a legal arbitration system to help keep down flames. We have
> > rules against bringing verbal assaults into heated debates so that
> > if you feel someone is insulting you, you may 'press charges'. If
> > evidence is presented, the person usually gets a warning. 3 warnings
> > and your posting privileges get revoked for a period between 24-72 hours
> > to allow a 'cool down' period on the list. This was implemented out
> > of neccessity because the list was averaging between 150 to 300
> > messages a day with most of those coming from only a handful of
> > people.
> 
> Ironically, I found that the legal code *caused* many flames, for
> various reasons. This is my interpretation, and I "assign credit" (in
> genetic programming terms) for dozens of flames between various
> parties to the existence of a legal code that encouraged/facillitated
> the filing of charges and countercharges, the issuance of warnings and
> other judgements, and the seemingly endless debate about all of these
> issues, as well as of the charges.

  All true, there was a "shakeout" in the legal system which caused
huge debates over the fairness and objectivity of it. Everything
has settled down since the commercialization of the list and
since the big players have left.

> >    A common way of resolving a standoff debate on the Extropians list
> > is to put your money where your mouth is -- a bet. This causes someone
> > to get off their lazy ass and go look up the citation and present it
> 
> With due respect for Ray here, this worked better in theory than in
> practice. The issuance of a challenge typically resulted in each side
> firing new volleys of charges, of clarifications, and of boring public
> debate about the terms, judgement criteria, who would hold the money,
> etc. Ad nauseum. I recall only one fairly positive example: some bet

  I agree that it worked better in theory than in practice, but it did
seem to have the effect of shutting down a 'is so, is not, is so!, is not!'
flame. For instance, Perry would often get involved in a discussion
where each side was claiming a statistic and firmly standing by it
without offering a reference. Perry would often end a thread like
this by betting a huge sum of money that he was right. It seemed
to me, that it often quieted the other person down. The claims might
not have been resolved (because no one took up the bet), but the endless
standoff of counter claims would end.

  Besides bets, there was Derek Zahn's accountability society
which had one positive result and almost none of the negative flamage
that bets had. 

> By the way, so far as I am aware, *nobody* has ever been kicked off
> the Cypherpunks list. Not even Detweiler, who asked to be removed last
> Novemeber or so, as he was entering his terminal phase. 

   The disadvantage of this is that since your list software has no
filtering capability, I must deal with a huge flood of messages
everyday that Detweiler generates. For a simple list like
majordomo, I think deleting trouble makers is a good short term solution.

> There may be a lesson here. A formal legal code encourages "law
> hacking" by those with an axe to grind. A formal system which attempts
> to cover all possibilities encourages incompleteness, loopholes. (This
> is often analyzed as being the result of Goedel's Theorem, which I
> suppose it is in an informal sense :-}.)

  An interesting speculation. Legal systems are, after all, pretty
close to being 'formal systems' Nobody ever said a legal system had
to be consistent though. ;-)
 
> I like the Cypherpunks system a lot better. Instead of bogging down in
> claims, charges, formal bets, adjudication, appeals, etc., there are
> relatively few if any rules. Somehow the turkeys end up leaving.

  With much heat and light generated in the meantime which is fine for
some people, but irritating to others. Keeping in mind Coase's Theorem
and Spontaneous Order, Harry and I are going beyond the idea of
PPLs by attempting to create list software which allows 'personal
justice', filtering, reputations, etc. We personally believe that
the whitewater of noise which is out there now will become a tsunami
when Joe Sixpack gets his 'entitled' account. The only way to defend
yourself from this assault in cyberspace will be intelligent communications
software.

-Ray

Ray writes:
 > Tim writes:
 > > Ironically, I found that the legal code *caused* many flames, for
 > > various reasons. This is my interpretation, and I "assign credit" (in
 > > genetic programming terms) for dozens of flames between various
 > > parties to the existence of a legal code that encouraged/facillitated
 > > the filing of charges and countercharges, the issuance of warnings and
 > > other judgements, and the seemingly endless debate about all of these
 > > issues, as well as of the charges.
 > 
 >   All true, there was a "shakeout" in the legal system which caused
 > huge debates over the fairness and objectivity of it. Everything
 > has settled down since the commercialization of the list and
 > since the big players have left.

Well, gee, perhaps the commercialization of the Ext list is as much
responsible for the end of the shakeout period than the use of clever
list software.

Since it's traditional to push the analogy to ridicule: I'd be more
than happy to run a "$10,000 or 100 Tacky Tokens per year" mailing
list. I'm guessing that I'll see very few debates on my list about the
fairness of the system.

 >   With much heat and light generated in the meantime which is fine
 > for some people, but irritating to others. Keeping in mind Coase's
 > Theorem and Spontaneous Order, Harry and I are going beyond the
 > idea of PPLs by attempting to create list software which allows
 > 'personal justice', filtering, reputations, etc. We personally
 > believe that the whitewater of noise which is out there now will
 > become a tsunami when Joe Sixpack gets his 'entitled' account. The
 > only way to defend yourself from this assault in cyberspace will be
 > intelligent communications software.

Is intelligence alone a panacea? or is harsh economic reality really
the motivating factor on the Ext list? I've seen a hundred posts in
the last few days about the awful, horrible pay-per-byte services that
doom the free Internet, but it doesn't change the fact that I'll think
twice about paying two cents for the privilege of saying my two cents.

nathan

Ray Cromwell writes, quoting me:

> > By the way, so far as I am aware, *nobody* has ever been kicked off
> > the Cypherpunks list. Not even Detweiler, who asked to be removed last
> > Novemeber or so, as he was entering his terminal phase. 
> 
>    The disadvantage of this is that since your list software has no
> filtering capability, I must deal with a huge flood of messages
> everyday that Detweiler generates. For a simple list like
> majordomo, I think deleting trouble makers is a good short term solution.

Ah, yes, the Extropians filtering software. As Ray of course knows,
the Cypherpunks list offered to use this software, and discussions
were ongoing for a while. This started about a year or so ago, and
fizzled out last fall. (I now assume some fo the fizzling out had to
do with plans to ultimately commercialize the software, via the "Weir"
thing.)

Ray and Harry are of course free to choose their strategy as they see
fit. Here's one suggestion:

Suggestion: Offer a subscription-based list remailer which gateways
the Cypherpunks list through the "Weir" software. This could be
handled by Ray & Harry, Inc., or via some customer who bought their
list software to provide such a service.

This is consistent with what Eric has said is OK: subcontractors can
distribue the list with all messages encrypted (as Hal Finney does),
or with naughty words censored, or with only messages containing the
word "Detweiler" blocked (or passed, for the masochists). Solves the
"moderation" problem some people keep saying needs a centralized
solution.

It also gives the Ray & Harry Corporation a chance to debug the
software on another list, a list very interested (as Extropians are)
in reputation filters and related ideas.

> > I like the Cypherpunks system a lot better. Instead of bogging down in
> > claims, charges, formal bets, adjudication, appeals, etc., there are
> > relatively few if any rules. Somehow the turkeys end up leaving.
> 
>   With much heat and light generated in the meantime which is fine for
> some people, but irritating to others. Keeping in mind Coase's Theorem
> and Spontaneous Order, Harry and I are going beyond the idea of
> PPLs by attempting to create list software which allows 'personal
> justice', filtering, reputations, etc. We personally believe that
> the whitewater of noise which is out there now will become a tsunami
> when Joe Sixpack gets his 'entitled' account. The only way to defend
> yourself from this assault in cyberspace will be intelligent communications
> software.

So then let's see it.

I will pay around $20-30 a year for such filtering capabilities as I had
when I was on the Extropians list. (I'm not sure much more is needed
with the present volume of mail. This may change in the future,
possibly as a result of this kind of software making mailing lists
more tolerable, but for now I'll settle for the simple ::exclude
capabilities.)

I suspect 50 of us might pay the same amount. 

--Tim May


-- 
..........................................................................
Timothy C. May         | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,  
tcmay@netcom.com       | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
408-688-5409           | knowledge, reputations, information markets, 
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA  | black markets, collapse of governments.
Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."