RE: Come On

Connie Sadler <sadler_c@hosp.stanford.edu> writes:

<I find lines like the above very offensive/non-professional. I 
>won't let it stop me from continuing on, but what's the 
>point? I really don't get it.

CypherPUNKs is an offshoot of the cyberpunk paradigm, which can be
stated as "high tech/lowlife".  There are no claims of professionalism
as far as I know.  If cypherpunks share a common attribute, it is
probably their enjoyment of the _practice_ of encryption and related
disciplines.

I did not notice anyone insult you personally.  Surely if you find the
language offensive, the solution is to filter your mail, or else 
unsubscribe.

--
Alex Brock

Cyber City says:
> CypherPUNKs is an offshoot of the cyberpunk paradigm, which can be
> stated as "high tech/lowlife".

Huh?

Where did you get that idea?

So far as I know, the name was picked because it was catchy because
the word "cyberpunk" was already in use. Most of us are not "punks" in
any real sense of the word (although of course some might be; there
are people on this list with dozens of different points of view and
lifestyles). I'm not an "offshoot" of anything, certainly not of a
William Gibson novel, and beyond all that, the notion that "cyberpunk"
was something real and not just a term for a style of SF novel has
very little support to it outside of certain cheap flashy magazines.

Perry

C'punks,

Okay, I'm getting just a little tired of this thread.  I've addressed 
several posts in private e-mail, but I think one public statement is 
required.

On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, Alex Brock, addressing Connie Sadler, wrote:

> . . .
> CypherPUNKs is an offshoot of the cyberpunk paradigm, which can be
> stated as "high tech/lowlife".  There are no claims of professionalism
> as far as I know.  If cypherpunks share a common attribute, it is
> probably their enjoyment of the _practice_ of encryption and related
> disciplines.

Yet another list member volunteers to speak for the group.  If Alex want 
to be a "low life," so be it.  Just don't drag the rest of us along.  I 
thought Cypherpunks were interested in taking positive steps to protect 
privacy.  Connie has told us she shares that goal, so I think that makes 
her just as much a Cypherpunk as the rest of us "lowlifes."

> I did not notice anyone insult you personally.  Surely if you find the
> language offensive, the solution is to filter your mail, or else 
> unsubscribe.

By the same token, Alex, nobody personally pulled your chain, either. 
Maybe you should filter Connie from your mail, or else unsubscribe. 

My fellow Cypherpunks, "can't we all just get along?"  Let's continue to
focus on privacy.  Isn't that what we're here for?


 S a n d y

P.S.  I've exchanged e-mail with Connie.  She's very nice and very much 
      on our side.  A good recruit for Cypherpunks.