Re: How's that again?

At 02:38 PM 3/12/96 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                          SANDY SANDFORT
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
>C'punks,
>
>On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, jim bell wrote:
>
>> You will notice, I assume, that I have been and can be tactful to most 
>> people; where exceptions exist, they are typically among anonymous posters 
>> (such as this "Black Unicorn") ...
>> Oh, yes, and I can't forget Padgett Peterson, who has raised spinelessness 
>> to a new art form.
>
>Hey, Jim, don't forget me.  You are the only person I have ever
>specifically UNinvited to one of my parties in over a decade of
>hosting same.  I guess that makes you special.
>
>
> S a n d y  (just another statist apologist)  S a n d f o r t

You're confused.  You're describe YOUR reaction to ME, not MY reaction to 
YOU.  And I am unaware of being invited to a "party," and now that I've 
discovered what a sleazy person Alan Olsen and his merry band are, it is 
really doubtful that I would have enjoyed what was advertised as a 
cypherpunks meeting, but which you now claim was a "party."  Your level of 
"honesty" is showing.

jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com> writes:
> At 02:38 PM 3/12/96 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
> >Hey, Jim, don't forget me.  You are the only person I have ever
> >specifically UNinvited to one of my parties in over a decade of
> >hosting same.  I guess that makes you special.
>
> You're confused.  You're describe YOUR reaction to ME, not MY reaction to
> YOU.  And I am unaware of being invited to a "party," and now that I've
> discovered what a sleazy person Alan Olsen and his merry band are, it is
> really doubtful that I would have enjoyed what was advertised as a
> cypherpunks meeting, but which you now claim was a "party."  Your level of
> "honesty" is showing.

"Cypherpunk" is not a trademarked name. I've seen people say on this list
(paraphrased) "I'm a cypherpunk, and I oppose unrestricted free speech
because we must silence {homophobes}child pornographers|terrorists}" or
"I'm hosting a cypherpunks meeting and X will not be permitted to come
because I don't like his political views". I like reading this list, but
if these views are compatible with being a cypherpunk, then I'm not one.

---

Dr. Dimitri Vulis
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote:

> "Cypherpunk" is not a trademarked name. I've seen people say on this list
> (paraphrased)..."I'm hosting a cypherpunks meeting and X will not be 
> permitted to come because I don't like his political views". I like 
> reading this list, but if these views are compatible with being a 
> cypherpunk, then I'm not one. 
 
No one has ever made an announcement on the Cypherpunks list such
as the one you "paraphrased."  The meetings have always been open
to everyone.

If the good doctor is referring to my univiting of Jim Bell to
a private party held AFTER a Cypherpunk meeting he had better 
get his facts straight.  Jim Bell would have been welcome at the
Cypherpunks meeting.  He would not have been welcome at my party,
though, because of his intemperate bad manners, NOT his politics.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote:

> jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com> writes:
> > At 02:38 PM 3/12/96 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
> > >Hey, Jim, don't forget me.  You are the only person I have ever
> > >specifically UNinvited to one of my parties in over a decade of
> > >hosting same.  I guess that makes you special.
> >
> > You're confused.  You're describe YOUR reaction to ME, not MY reaction to
> > YOU.  And I am unaware of being invited to a "party," and now that I've
> > discovered what a sleazy person Alan Olsen and his merry band are, it is
> > really doubtful that I would have enjoyed what was advertised as a
> > cypherpunks meeting, but which you now claim was a "party."  Your level of
> > "honesty" is showing.
> 
> "Cypherpunk" is not a trademarked name. I've seen people say on this list
> (paraphrased) "I'm a cypherpunk, and I oppose unrestricted free speech
> because we must silence {homophobes}child pornographers|terrorists}" or
> "I'm hosting a cypherpunks meeting and X will not be permitted to come
> because I don't like his political views". I like reading this list,

You're a cypherpunk then.

---
My prefered and soon to be permanent e-mail address: unicorn@schloss.li
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information