8 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child
>My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li >"In fact, had Unicorn not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est >Detweiler might not have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti >00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information Unicorn = Detweiler = Agent Provocateur
On Sun, 31 Mar 1996 JonWienke@aol.com wrote: > >My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li > >"In fact, had Unicorn not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est > >Detweiler might not have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti > >00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information > > Unicorn = Detweiler = Agent Provocateur Uh. No. Unicorn != Detweiler = Agent Provocateur I won't post my opinions upon whom I think is an Agent Provocateur, but Uni isn't one. Ben. Ben Samman..............................................samman@cs.yale.edu Want to give a soon-to-be college grad a job? Mail me for a resume Je voudrais travailler en France. J'ai deja obtenu une autorisation de travail.
On Sun, 31 Mar 1996 JonWienke@aol.com wrote: > >My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li > >"In fact, had Unicorn not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est > >Detweiler might not have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti > >00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information > > Unicorn = Detweiler = Agent Provocateur Uh huh, whatever. --- My preferred 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
On Sun, 31 Mar 1996 JonWienke@aol.com wrote: > >My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li > >"In fact, had Unicorn not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est > >Detweiler might not have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti > >00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information > > Unicorn = Detweiler = Agent Provocateur Well, I won't say it's impossible. However, for those of you who are relatively new to the list, Mr. Unicorn has been a regular (and useful) contributor to the list. My belief in this has been unwavering. Excepting, of course, the recent Unicorn/Bell flamefest, which we all get sucked into occasionally. My opinion of Mr. Bell on the same issue has varied widely; however, he has participated (in recent times) in more flamewars on the list than anyone, including the usual flamers (ie Perry, me, etc.). It is also interesting to note that Mr. Unicorn talks knowledgably about several fields; Mr. Bell talks about one field, and there are those who would dispute his knowledge about it. I have had an e-mail correspondence with Mr. Bell that lasted several messages. In it, we were both civil and friendly; I post this now not to take sides in the flamewar, but merely to note that, in my opinion, it is improbable that Black Unicorn is Detweiller, and that, although I missed the origin of this thread, it is likely a suggestion from Mr. Bell or one of his associates, intended to discredit him. If Mr. Unicorn is indeed Detweiller, it is in the mold of Vlad Z. Nuri, who (while almost certainly Detweiller) has produced useful contributions on the list, while refraining from acting out. It is also worth noting that the original Detweiller, in a sense, played De Sade to Tim May's Rousseau, in that he used an unorthodox, but effective, critical technique. (This is, in fact, one reading of De Sade's "pornography" -- an interesting counterexample to what was trumpeted on _Both_ sides of the recent Firing Line debate: that pornography or obscenity is, whether or not protected, devoid of any intellectual content.) Jon Lasser (his own tentacle :-) ) ---------- Jon Lasser (410)494-3072 - Obscenity is a crutch for jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu inarticulate motherfuckers. http://www.goucher.edu/~jlasser/ Finger for PGP key (1024/EC001E4D) - Fuck the CDA.
Bruce Zambini <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu> >If Mr. Unicorn is indeed Detweiller, it is in the mold of Vlad Z. Nuri, >who (while almost certainly Detweiller) has produced useful contributions >on the list, while refraining from acting out. sigh. I don't know why this periodic identity madness visits this list. does it have something to do with phases of the moon? do you guys do harass everyone who hasn't personally attended a cypherpunk meeting? are the cpunks going to implement uncrackable identity cards for authorizing posts before the congress does so for immigration security? as for your speculations, all I can say is that Mr. Unicorn is one of the many people who seem to have violent prejudices against me posting here because of some supposed similarity of my style to this notorious Detweiller fellow. so it wouldn't make much sense to me if he was really me, er, sorry, Detweiller. <g> it seems to me that by now, people might have figured out that all this silly identity speculation is a total waste of time (and tends only to start flamewars) on a list that is by official administration and consensus agreement, "anything goes". ah, but some people are slow learners and need a lot of reiteration before they begin to understand. in this forum, there is only a message. the messenger is irrelevant. we could all post anonymously and have precisely the same effect. in fact, I don't think it would be all that bad of an idea. >It is also worth noting that the original Detweiller, in a sense, played >De Sade to Tim May's Rousseau, in that he used an unorthodox, but >effective, critical technique. Tim May == Rousseau??? hehehehehe. and I fail to comprehend how anyone so universally despised as Detweiller could be considered to have employed any "effective critical technique". maybe I should send him some email, but alas I perceive that to be another waste of time. the point of this message is to say, will everyone give it a rest? who cares? why do you think it matters?
On Sun, 31 Mar 1996, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > > Bruce Zambini <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu> > >If Mr. Unicorn is indeed Detweiller, it is in the mold of Vlad Z. Nuri, > >who (while almost certainly Detweiller) has produced useful contributions > >on the list, while refraining from acting out. > > sigh. I don't know why this periodic identity madness visits this > list. does it have something to do with phases of the moon? do you guys > do harass everyone who hasn't personally attended a cypherpunk > meeting? I have personally attended a cypherpunks meeting. Seems that's not one of the required ommissions. > as for your speculations, all I can say is that Mr. Unicorn is one of > the many people who seem to have violent prejudices against me posting > here because of some supposed similarity of my style to this notorious > Detweiller fellow. so it wouldn't make much sense to me if he was > really me, er, sorry, Detweiller. <g> Cute. > it seems to me that by now, people might have figured out that all this > silly identity speculation is a total waste of time (and tends only > to start flamewars) on a list that is > by official administration and consensus agreement, "anything goes". Perhaps, if these identity issues tire you so, you should stop fostering them? > in this forum, there is only a message. the messenger is irrelevant. This, of course, ignores all issues of reputation capital. The message is still only as good as the messenger, which is why I have maintained this nym for so long. Or more accurately, the message is only as good as it is heard. The message is heard in proportion to the reputation capital the messenger holds. > we could all post anonymously and have precisely the same effect. in > fact, I don't think it would be all that bad of an idea. I believe this in error. This is why I work to debunk Mr. Bell, and why I don't post with complete anonyminity. Of course, as you have no reputation capital of note, you would be of the view that posting without any name at all would be of no worth. You, like Mr. Bell, have little to lose. --- My preferred 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
Bruce Zambini <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu> writes: > On Sun, 31 Mar 1996 JonWienke@aol.com wrote: > > Unicorn = Detweiler = Agent Provocateur > > Well, I won't say it's impossible. Don't you get the hint -- Unicorn == Sir Lancelot == Lance. --- Dr. Dimitri Vulis Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 31-Mar-96 Witch Hunts by Bruce Zambini@rwd.gouche > effective, critical technique. (This is, in fact, one reading of De > Sade's "pornography" -- an interesting counterexample to what was > trumpeted on _Both_ sides of the recent Firing Line debate: that > pornography or obscenity is, whether or not protected, devoid of any > intellectual content.) That's not entirely true. The ACLU's position, as provided by Ira Glasser at the debate, is that pornography is not a legal term d'art, that it is presumptively protected by the First Amendment, and furthermore that sexually explicit images are not necessarily harmful to minors. The difference between "porn" and "obscenity" is intellectual content. -Declan (Not speaking for the ACLU)