Re: A vote of confidence for Sandy

At 07:14 PM 1/10/97 -0500, Ray Arachelian wrote:
>Sandfort isn't the only one who will do this, there will be a pool of 
>moderators. Regardless of your personality conflict, I am sure that Sandy 
>will remain fair and allow appropriate posts from you through. i.e. 
>anything to do with crypto. :)

Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. I do
not know at this time if my services will be required. I am certain that I
would not enjoy this job. I have better things to do than moderate
Cypherpunks. But as a long time subscriber, I care about the list. I see
only one alternative to moderating Cypherpunks. And that is shutting it
down to let other lists pick up the various parts of the discussion. Hard
core crypto can go to Coderpunks, crypto and politics can go to
Cryptography. The drivel and whining can go to hell. I am willing to give
the moderation experiment a chance. If it doesn't work, I will advocate
shutting down the list.

As with every TAZ that stays up for too long, Cypherpunks eventually got
infested by vermin. Vulis, aga, et al. come to mind. In my experience, once
that happens there is only one solution: take down the TAZ and start over
somewhere else. The problem is always the same: the belief that "anarchy"
means that you have to tolerate people shitting on everybody's floor.
Anarchy means no such thing.

[Since I filter on Vulis and aga in the body text of all incoming email, I
am unlikely to read any replies to this post. Of course, if I was to serve
as a co-moderator, I would read all messages and decide on them individually.]

Thanks,


-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred
   Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of
   your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime.
   http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm

At 8:19 PM -0800 1/10/97, Lucky Green wrote:
>Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. I do
>not know at this time if my services will be required. I am certain that I
>would not enjoy this job. I have better things to do than moderate
>Cypherpunks. But as a long time subscriber, I care about the list.

AMEN (as a short time subscriber).

If you need me as a moderator (if you need me, you are getting very
desperate), I will help.  However, I am going out of the country in two
weeks not to return until March 9, so stepping forward now is a bit silly.

Let me rant a bit about the "ideal" moderation structure.  Igor Chudov's
software lets people like Matt Blase and Bruce Schneier post whatever they
want.  (I would add people like Black Unicorn as well.  YMMV)  Other posts
go into a pool accessible to all moderators.  If one moderator approves,
the message goes out.  If N reject, it is rejected.  These rejections could
either be anonymous or be included in an x-moderators-rejecting: header for
the "worst of cypherpunks" list.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | in Pittsburgh, Packets in  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | Pakistan. - me             | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

Bill Frantz wrote:
> 
> At 8:19 PM -0800 1/10/97, Lucky Green wrote:
> >Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. I do
> >not know at this time if my services will be required. I am certain that I
> >would not enjoy this job. I have better things to do than moderate
> >Cypherpunks. But as a long time subscriber, I care about the list.
> 
> AMEN (as a short time subscriber).
> 
> If you need me as a moderator (if you need me, you are getting very
> desperate), I will help.  However, I am going out of the country in two
> weeks not to return until March 9, so stepping forward now is a bit silly.
> 
> Let me rant a bit about the "ideal" moderation structure.  Igor Chudov's
> software lets people like Matt Blase and Bruce Schneier post whatever they
> want.  (I would add people like Black Unicorn as well.  YMMV)  Other posts
> go into a pool accessible to all moderators.  If one moderator approves,
> the message goes out.  If N reject, it is rejected.  These rejections could
> either be anonymous or be included in an x-moderators-rejecting: header for
> the "worst of cypherpunks" list.

I think that Bill proposes a very interesting idea. His suggestion would
eliminate a lot of [well-grounded] suspicion about arbitrary rejections
at a "whim" of moderators.

My only concern is that there will be more work for moderators, because
in his scheme each "bad" message has to be reviewed by N people instead
of 1.

It is a tradeoff between a more liberal policy and efficient use of
moderators' time.

	- Igor.

Bill Frantz wrote:
> At 8:19 PM -0800 1/10/97, Lucky Green wrote:[snippo]
> Let me rant a bit about the "ideal" moderation structure.  Igor Chudov's
> software lets people like Matt Blase and Bruce Schneier post whatever they
> want.  (I would add people like Black Unicorn as well.  YMMV)  Other posts
> go into a pool accessible to all moderators.  If one moderator approves,
> the message goes out.  If N reject, it is rejected.  These rejections could
> either be anonymous or be included in an x-moderators-rejecting: header for
> the "worst of cypherpunks" list.

Let me guess.  Frantz started with electronic copies of Mein Kampf,
1984 (originally 1948), Brave New World, and Animal Farm, and did some
judicious substitutions:

Substitute "moderator" for "censor".
Substitute "pool" for "concentration camp".
Substitute "reject" for "liquidate".

And, they could do this anonymously, like the Gestapo, SS, LAPD, FBI,
CIA, FEMA, BATF, you get the picture.

Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com> writes:

> At 07:14 PM 1/10/97 -0500, Ray Arachelian wrote:
> >Sandfort isn't the only one who will do this, there will be a pool of
> >moderators. Regardless of your personality conflict, I am sure that Sandy
> >will remain fair and allow appropriate posts from you through. i.e.
> >anything to do with crypto. :)
>
> Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. ...

As a moderator, Plucky would certainly approve his own articles.
In fact, anything he submits would be approved automatically.
In this one he goes on to write:

> As with every TAZ that stays up for too long, Cypherpunks eventually got
> infested by vermin. Vulis, aga, et al. come to mind. In my experience, once
> that happens there is only one solution: take down the TAZ and start over
> somewhere else. ...

If I were to say, "I am not vermin", my response would be rejected by the
moderator(s) as being off-topic.

> [Since I filter on Vulis and aga in the body text of all incoming email, I
> am unlikely to read any replies to this post. ...

Therefore, Plucky Green (who by the way posts on news.admin.net-abuse.* and
various Macintosh newsgroups under his real name) is already not bothered
by my response. He just doesn't want others to see it.

Plucky Green is in turn responding to Ray Arachelian, who runs a "filtered"
version of Cypherpunks. Ray posts lies about me to both the main "cypher
punks" mailing list and his "filtered" one (falsely accusing me of "spamming",
of causing mail loops, etc). When I reply and refute his lies, my responses
don't go to Ray's "filtered" list. Plucky wants the extend his ability to
suppress the victim's ability to refute libel.

ObCrypto: I challenge the "cypher punks" to decode the following text:

Nffubyr prafbe Wbua Tvyzber vf n cngurgvp byq pbpxfhpxre.

---

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

Lucky Green wrote:
[snip]
> ...as a long time subscriber, I care about the list. I see only one
> alternative to moderating Cypherpunks. And that is shutting it down...

What am I missing here?  Why don't these assholes just go away?

They bitch and moan constantly about other people's whining, then they
fill the list with their own whining. More hypocrisy from "cypherpunks".