VOTE NO!

On mandatory sigs: I personally don't fathom the
idea (as some of you do), I've always perceived 
PGP(Tm) as something I would use when I really had 
something sensitive to send a friend, or when I was 
making a public announcement to a mailing list or 
newsgroup. But to use it to sign EVERY single piece 
of mail I send to cypherpunks is asking a lot from 
me as my setup is very similar to Tim Mays', and I 
don't want to be singled out because of it! I think 
the list should proceed as it has since its 
formation, and subscribers should just sign their 
messages as they see fit. I know I'm not posting 
anything new, but considering the torrential flood 
of trash that Detweiler posted, it's not that much 
of a waste. :-)= Good evening.

Unbelievably, I don't think this old canard has come up yet in this
discussion.

   I've always perceived 
   PGP(Tm) as something I would use when I really had 
   something sensitive to send a friend, 

If you encrypt only some messages and not others, every use of
encryption will indicate that something significant is going on, which
is a first class message of its own.  Only if all messages to
particular correspondents are encrypted do you reveal no information
about importance.

Encryption still has benefit here, but the argument that it should
only be used when important has no merit.

Eric