Fat Cocksucker John Gilmore-ASSHOLE!

On Fri, 15 Nov 1996, Mike McNally wrote:

> Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 09:03:48 -0600
> From: Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com>
> Reply-To: freedom-knights@jetcafe.org
> To: aga <aga@dhp.com>
> Cc: freedom-knights@jetcafe.org, Dave Hayes <dave@kachina.jetcafe.org>,
>     declan@well.com, InterNet Freedom Council <ifc@pgh.org>,
>     cypherpunks@toad.com
> Subject: Re: THAT is what makes John Gilmore an ASSHOLE!
> 
> aga wrote:
> > 
> > No it ain't; not after the list gets so big.  Public newsgroups
> > lose all rights of censorship by the owners, and that is law.
> 
> Guffaw, guffaw.
> 
PUKE , PUKE !!!  You are a stupid bastard to laugh.

> (So what if John decided simply to pull the plug on toad in order to
> plug in a new hot tub?)
> 

So what the fuck?  That matters not.  The point is that the 
cypherpunks is an "all or nothing" proposition.  There is no
"in between" allowed any more.  After a certain level, EVERYTHING
reaches the "public doamin," and that is the *common-law of
cyberspace.*

Like, why is the fatso John Gilmore out here talking about this?
Steve Boursy says all of this should go to UseNet, so it goes.

> ______c_________________________________________________________________
> Mike M Nally * IBM % Tivoli * Austin TX  * How quickly we forget that
> mailto:m5@tivoli.com mailto:m101@io.com  * "deer processing" and "data
> http://www.io.com/~m101/                 * processing" are different!
> 

We want John Gilmore to respond to this censorous matter on the net.

-aga

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

C'punks,

On Sat, 16 Nov 1996, legal expert aga wrote:

> ...cypherpunks is an "all or nothing" proposition...After a
> certain level, EVERYTHING reaches the "public doamin," and that
> is the *common-law of cyberspace.*

As I'm sure aga knows, "common law" is that form of jurisprudence 
in which cases of first which are appealed to a higher court set
legal precedents which are subsequently binding on lower courts.

I must admit, it appears "Aga" has the advantage of me, as I did
not study the *common-law of cyberspace* back when I was in law
school.  (Unfortunately, my education pre-dates the existance of
cyberspace.)

As a favor to me and other's on the list who would like to know
as much as "Aga" does about the *common-law of cyberspace* I ask
"Aga" to please share his knowledge with us.  For starters, a 
list of the most relevant appelate cases embodied in the *common-
law of cyberspace* would be appreciated.


 S a n d y

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

On Sat, 16 Nov 1996, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 08:51:37 -0800 (PST)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
> To: aga <aga@dhp.com>
> Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com
> Subject: Re: AGA'S LIMITED VOCABULARY
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                           SANDY SANDFORT
>  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> 
> C'punks,
> 

Now just one moment cunt.  This ain't cyberpunks.
I never joined that motherfucking list.  If you want
to talk to me, you dump the motherfucking list.  That
fucking list is a waste of time, and I ain't going to
reply to any of those assholes any more.

If you want to talk to me, you go to the Freedom-Knights
or the InterNet Freedom Council ONLY.

> On Sat, 16 Nov 1996, legal expert aga wrote:
> 
> > ...cypherpunks is an "all or nothing" proposition...After a
> > certain level, EVERYTHING reaches the "public doamin," and that
> > is the *common-law of cyberspace.*
> 
> As I'm sure aga knows, "common law" is that form of jurisprudence 
> in which cases of first which are appealed to a higher court set
> legal precedents which are subsequently binding on lower courts.
> 
> I must admit, it appears "Aga" has the advantage of me, as I did
> not study the *common-law of cyberspace* back when I was in law
> school.  (Unfortunately, my education pre-dates the existance of
> cyberspace.)
> 

What year did you graduate from Law School?

> As a favor to me and other's on the list who would like to know
> as much as "Aga" does about the *common-law of cyberspace* I ask
> "Aga" to please share his knowledge with us.  For starters, a 
> list of the most relevant appelate cases embodied in the *common-
> law of cyberspace* would be appreciated.
> 
> 
>  S a n d y
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 

Just how old are you, Sandy?

Again, we dump the stupid fucking list, or I don't talk
with you any more.

out,

-aga

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

C'punks and others,

On Sun, 17 Nov 1996, aga wrote:

> Now just one moment cunt. 

Colorful, yet sadly ineffectual.  

> This ain't cyberpunks.

No, it's Cypherpunks (and others).  
         ^^^^^^^^^^^
> I never joined that motherfucking list. 

Perhaps you are laboring under a misconception.  Cypherpunks is
about the use of technology to protect privacy.  Perhaps you 
were confusing it with that other list you are on:
alt.sex.yourmother.

> If you want to talk to me, you dump the motherfucking list. 
> That fucking list is a waste of time, and I ain't going to
> reply to any of those assholes any more.

Let me guess; you weren't an English major, right?

> If you want to talk to me, you go to the Freedom-Knights
> or the InterNet Freedom Council ONLY.

Thanks for your suggestion.
 
> What year did you graduate from Law School?

Irrelevant, but it was 1975.  More importantly, though, when did
YOU graduate from law school?
 
> Again, we dump the stupid fucking list, or I don't talk
> with you any more.

Kind of funny that you included Cypherpunks in YOUR reply, but
don't want me to.  I guess you prefer having a captive audience
of your cronies.  "Freedom Knights" yeah, right.  

So given your above ultimatum, I guess you are going to weasle
out of sharing your vast legal knowledge with us as per my 
request.  To wit:

> > As a favor to me and other's on the list who would like to know
> > as much as "Aga" does about the *common-law of cyberspace* I ask
> > "Aga" to please share his knowledge with us.  For starters, a
> > list of the most relevant appelate cases embodied in the *common-
> > law of cyberspace* would be appreciated.

What a pity.


 S a n d y

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

On Sun, 17 Nov 1996, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 07:45:17 -0800 (PST)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
> To: aga <aga@dhp.com>
> Cc: freedom-knights@jetcafe.org, InterNet Freedom Council <ifc@pgh.org>,
>     cypherpunks@toad.com
> Subject: Re: AGA'S LIMITED VOCABULARY
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                           SANDY SANDFORT
>  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> 
> C'punks and others,
> 
> On Sun, 17 Nov 1996, aga wrote:
> 
> > Now just one moment cunt. 
> 
> Colorful, yet sadly ineffectual.  
> 
> > This ain't cyberpunks.
> 
> No, it's Cypherpunks (and others).  
>          ^^^^^^^^^^^

o.k., a fucking typo.  I make it often, because there
is also an alt.cyberpunks newsgroup, so what the fuck...

> > I never joined that motherfucking list. 
> 
> Perhaps you are laboring under a misconception.  Cypherpunks is
> about the use of technology to protect privacy.  Perhaps you 
> were confusing it with that other list you are on:
> alt.sex.yourmother.
> 

No, it is your mother I have been fucking.

> > If you want to talk to me, you dump the motherfucking list. 
> > That fucking list is a waste of time, and I ain't going to
> > reply to any of those assholes any more.
> 
> Let me guess; you weren't an English major, right?
> 

Hey stupid motherfucker, you still have the cypherpunks mailing
list in the header.  Don't you know how to listen?

> > If you want to talk to me, you go to the Freedom-Knights
> > or the InterNet Freedom Council ONLY.
> 
> Thanks for your suggestion.
>  

And ai am telling you that you get no more responses to any
commo with the cypherpunks list in the header.

dig?

> > What year did you graduate from Law School?
> 
> Irrelevant, but it was 1975.  More importantly, though, when did
> YOU graduate from law school?
>  

1975.  And my school was better than your school.

I was the fucking class President in Law School.  We
fucked on Library tables at Pitt.  Where the fuck did
you go to school?

> > Again, we dump the stupid fucking list, or I don't talk
> > with you any more.
> 
> Kind of funny that you included Cypherpunks in YOUR reply, but
> don't want me to.  I guess you prefer having a captive audience
> of your cronies.  "Freedom Knights" yeah, right.  
> 

no stupid, as I told you, I do not chop headers.
I just will refuse to reply to you any more.

> So given your above ultimatum, I guess you are going to weasle
> out of sharing your vast legal knowledge with us as per my 
> request.  To wit:
> 
> > > As a favor to me and other's on the list who would like to know
> > > as much as "Aga" does about the *common-law of cyberspace* I ask
> > > "Aga" to please share his knowledge with us.  For starters, a
> > > list of the most relevant appelate cases embodied in the *common-
> > > law of cyberspace* would be appreciated.
> 
> What a pity.
> 
> 
>  S a n d y
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 

You will have to contact the Law Systems Institute for the answers to
your questions.

no more stupid fucking cypherpunks list, PERIOD.

-aGod

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

C'punks and others,

On Sun, 17 Nov 1996, aga wrote:

> Hey stupid motherfucker, you still have the cypherpunks mailing
> list in the header.  Don't you know how to listen?

Sorry, what was that you were saying?  I wasn't listening.
 
> And ai am telling you that you get no more responses to any
> commo with the cypherpunks list in the header.

Promises, promises.
 
> no stupid, as I told you, I do not chop headers.
> I just will refuse to reply to you any more.

OkeeDokee.
 
> You will have to contact the Law Systems Institute for the
> answers to your questions.

Yeah, I kinda thought you were just blowing legal smoke.

> no more stupid fucking cypherpunks list, PERIOD.

Gawd, do all of you (titter) "Freedom-Knights" have sychronized
periods, or what?


 S a n d y

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

aga <aga@dhp.com> writes:
> > (So what if John decided simply to pull the plug on toad in order to
> > plug in a new hot tub?)
>
> So what the fuck?  That matters not.  The point is that the
> cypherpunks is an "all or nothing" proposition.  There is no
> "in between" allowed any more.  After a certain level, EVERYTHING
> reaches the "public doamin," and that is the *common-law of
> cyberspace.*

He might as well - he's got zero credibility. Let him soak in the hot
tub with all the Cygnus Support employees, whose biggest qualification
for getting a job with John Gilmore is to have a big dick.

> Like, why is the fatso John Gilmore out here talking about this?
> Steve Boursy says all of this should go to UseNet, so it goes.

Yes - remember how John Gilmore opposed creating an unmoderated cypherpunks
newsgroup, so he could stay in "control"?

> We want John Gilmore to respond to this censorous matter on the net.

He tried to keep his censorship secret, but he's been forced to talk about it.
In fact, he called his shameful actions "an act of leadership". He sounds
like Hitler.

---

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