Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks

Someone wrote to me:

>Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
>write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
>people will have to be filtered.

Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.

>I realize that normal people are few and far between in cypher punks.

There may be quite a few normal and knowledgeable people left among the
subscribers, but most posters are indeed militant homosexual censors
who don't care about crypto except to drop a few "kewl" phrases - like
Paul Bradley's infamous "brute-force attack on one-time pads".

>I am NOT a cypher-punk and I hope that you do not class me as one, I am
>merely interested in cryptography and believe it or not I actually pick
>up tips every now and again from the list.

I'm sure you're not a "cypher punk" - you're both too smart and too
straight. :-) A while back I saw an announcement of a "cypher punks"
meating where Jim Bell was explicitly disinvited, and I announced that
I don't consider myself a "cypher punk". Jim Bell is a pro-censorship
asshole, but I will defend his freedom of speech nevertheless.

Occasional tidbits of useful information do still appear on this list.

>I am against moderation on the list and I aggree that Gilmug is a lying
>cocksucker. Please bear in mind that not everyone on the list is a
>"jew-hating" faggot with nothing but shit between their ears.

I wholeheartedly agree - however anyone who describes himself as a
"cypher punk", after John Gilmore's dishonorable actions, probably is.

---

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

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> most posters are indeed militant homosexual censors
> who don't care about crypto except to drop a few "kewl" phrases - like
> Paul Bradley's infamous "brute-force attack on one-time pads".

 I thought it was 'brute-force attack on Maxipads'.

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> Someone wrote to me:
> >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
> >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
> >people will have to be filtered.

> Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
> like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
> many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
> and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
> don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
> on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.

Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.

If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?

In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
have two accounts?

Dale Thorn wrote:
> 
> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> > Someone wrote to me:
> > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
> > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
> > >people will have to be filtered.
> 
> > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
> > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
> > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
> > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
> > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
> > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
> 
> Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
> communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
> now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
> allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
> 
> If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
> attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
> questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
> is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
> list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
> would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
> 
> In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
> have two accounts?
> 

it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article
in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain
corrections) on these two directories.

diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.

take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation
does not screw you up).

thats it

	- Igor.

Delivered-To: reece-cpunks@taz.nceye.net
   Delivered-To: reece@taz.nceye.net
   Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:13:00 -0600 (CST)
   Cc: dlv@bwalk.dm.com, cypherpunks@toad.com, freedom-knights@jetcafe.org
   Reply-To: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov)
   From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
   X-No-Archive: yes
   Organization: Bool Sheet Software
   X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7]
   Content-Type: text
   Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
   Precedence: bulk

   Dale Thorn wrote:
   > 
   > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
   > > Someone wrote to me:
   > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
   > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
   > > >people will have to be filtered.
   > 
   > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
   > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
   > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
   > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
   > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
   > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
   > 
   > Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
   > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
   > now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
   > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
   > 
   > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
   > attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
   > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
   > is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
   > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
   > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
   > 
   > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
   > have two accounts?
   > 

   it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article
   in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain
   corrections) on these two directories.

   diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.

   take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation
   does not screw you up).

   thats it

If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with
timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all
the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the
moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).

Bryan Reece wrote:
> 
>    Dale Thorn wrote:
>    > 
>    > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
>    > > Someone wrote to me:
>    > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
>    > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
>    > > >people will have to be filtered.
>    > 
>    > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
>    > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
>    > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
>    > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
>    > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
>    > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
>    > 
>    > Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
>    > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
>    > now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
>    > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
>    > 
>    > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
>    > attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
>    > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
>    > is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
>    > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
>    > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
>    > 
>    > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
>    > have two accounts?
>    > 
> 
>    it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article
>    in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain
>    corrections) on these two directories.
> 
>    diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
> 
>    take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation
>    does not screw you up).
> 
>    thats it
> 
> If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with
> timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all
> the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the
> moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
> 

a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc.

	- Igor.

On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

> Bryan Reece wrote:
> > 
> >    Dale Thorn wrote:
> >    > 
> >    > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> >    > > Someone wrote to me:
> >    > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
> >    > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
> >    > > >people will have to be filtered.
> >    > 
> >    > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
> >    > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
> >    > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
> >    > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
> >    > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
> >    > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
> >    > 
> >    > Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
> >    > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
> >    > now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
> >    > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
> >    > 
> >    > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
> >    > attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
> >    > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
> >    > is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
> >    > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
> >    > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
> >    > 
> >    > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
> >    > have two accounts?
> >    > 
> > 
> >    it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article
> >    in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain
> >    corrections) on these two directories.
> > 
> >    diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
> > 
> >    take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation
> >    does not screw you up).
> > 
> >    thats it
> > 
> > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with
> > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all
> > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the
> > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
> > 
> 
> a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc.
> 
> 	- Igor.
> 

But x should be no more than 24.

aga wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> > Bryan Reece wrote:
> > > 
> > >    Dale Thorn wrote:
> > > 
> > > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with
> > > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all
> > > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the
> > > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
> > > 
> > 
> > a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc.
> > 
> > 	- Igor.
> > 
> 
> But x should be no more than 24.
> 

Yeah, 24 is a good ballpark figure.

	- Igor.

On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote:

>    Delivered-To: reece-cpunks@taz.nceye.net
>    Delivered-To: reece@taz.nceye.net
>    Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:13:00 -0600 (CST)
>    Cc: dlv@bwalk.dm.com, cypherpunks@toad.com, freedom-knights@jetcafe.org
>    Reply-To: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov)
>    From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
>    X-No-Archive: yes
>    Organization: Bool Sheet Software
>    X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7]
>    Content-Type: text
>    Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
>    Precedence: bulk
> 
>    Dale Thorn wrote:
>    > 
>    > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
>    > > Someone wrote to me:
>    > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
>    > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
>    > > >people will have to be filtered.
>    > 
>    > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
>    > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
>    > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
>    > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
>    > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
>    > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
>    > 
>    > Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
>    > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
>    > now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
>    > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
>    > 
>    > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
>    > attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
>    > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
>    > is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
>    > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
>    > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
>    > 
>    > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
>    > have two accounts?
>    > 
> 
>    it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article
>    in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain
>    corrections) on these two directories.
> 
>    diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
> 
>    take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation
>    does not screw you up).
> 
>    thats it
> 
> If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with
> timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all
> the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the
> moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
> 

Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right.
And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS
at each location, so you can write some batch programs to
save you the manual wwork.

Prof. aga wrote:
> 
> On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote:
> >    it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article
> >    in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain
> >    corrections) on these two directories.
> > 
> >    diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
> > 
> >    take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation
> >    does not screw you up).
> > 
> >    thats it
> > 
> > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with
> > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all
> > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the
> > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
> > 
> 
> Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right.
> And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS
> at each location, so you can write some batch programs to
> save you the manual wwork.
> 

No, one address is enough. You can look at a Unix tool called procmail,
which allows filtering of incoming messages. For example, you could
completely insulate yourself from, say, follower of clawed albino.

	- Igor.

On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

> Prof. aga wrote:
> > 
> > On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote:
> > >    it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article
> > >    in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain
> > >    corrections) on these two directories.
> > > 
> > >    diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another.
> > > 
> > >    take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation
> > >    does not screw you up).
> > > 
> > >    thats it
> > > 
> > > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with
> > > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all
> > > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the
> > > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet).
> > > 
> > 
> > Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right.
> > And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS
> > at each location, so you can write some batch programs to
> > save you the manual wwork.
> > 
> 
> No, one address is enough. You can look at a Unix tool called procmail,
> which allows filtering of incoming messages. For example, you could
> completely insulate yourself from, say, follower of clawed albino.
> 
> 	- Igor.
> 

But I am not the one who needs insulated.  I have a nice ISP who
does not get intimidated, but there are a dozen other guys out there
who the bitch has tried to eliminate access for in the past couple of
years, so the bitch is about to get exposed.

I have people working who will find out the real name of that cunt 
in the near future.

Mr. Thorn said:
> Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
> communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
> now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
> allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
   <snip> 
> In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
> have two accounts?

     Subscribe to unfiltered + flames. Anything that shows up twice was 
"filtered".

     Subscribe to unfiltered + flames and then filter all mail from flames
to a seperate "folder" to check at your leasure.

snow wrote:
> Mr. Thorn said:
> > Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
> > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
> > now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
> > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
>    <snip>
> > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
> > have two accounts? 
> Subscribe to unfiltered + flames. Anything that shows up twice was "filtered".
> Subscribe to unfiltered + flames and then filter all mail from flames
> to a seperate "folder" to check at your leasure.

I'm already getting multiple copies of messages I can't account for.
The frequency and number seem to be random, and I'm not counting
forwarded stuff.  Take the posts from the most "trusted" people.
Subtract out any personal cc's, account for additional lists subscribed
to, compare for similar (but not identical) posts, and still the
numbers don't add up.

On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote:

> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> > Someone wrote to me:
> > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
> > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
> > >people will have to be filtered.
> 
> > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
> > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
> > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
> > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
> > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
> > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
> 
> Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
> communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
> now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
> allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
> 
> If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
> attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
> questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
> is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
> list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
> would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
> 
> In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
> have two accounts?
> 
> 

You can not.  You need another account.

I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting
for him to respond.

Do you want another account to get the censored list at?

Delivered-To: reece-cpunks@taz.nceye.net
   Delivered-To: reece@taz.nceye.net
   Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:52:58 -0500 (EST)
   From: aga <aga@dhp.com>
   cc: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" <dlv@bwalk.dm.com>, cypherpunks@toad.com
   MIME-Version: 1.0
   Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
   Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
   Precedence: bulk

   On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote:

   > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
   > > Someone wrote to me:
   > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can
   > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL
   > > >people will have to be filtered.
   > 
   > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals
   > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's
   > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond
   > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you
   > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture
   > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D.
   > 
   > Here's a problem.  I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of
   > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying
   > now.  But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't
   > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses.
   > 
   > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his
   > attention, he would need to be punished in some way.  One of the
   > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to
   > is the uncensored list?  I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered
   > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle.  Is this something that
   > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship?
   > 
   > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
   > have two accounts?
   > 
   > 

   You can not.  You need another account.

Not quite true.  I'm going to use one account on a host running qmail
to find the differences between the lists (one will go to
accountname-mod@qmailhost, the other to accountname-raw, and a cron
job will do the comparisons every few minutes).  If you have an
account on a unix box running sendmail, you can have .forward run a
program to sort messages out by sender into separate files for normal
mail, the raw list, and the moderated list.

   I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting
   for him to respond.

   Do you want another account to get the censored list at?

aga wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote:
> > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to
> > have two accounts?

> You can not.  You need another account.
> I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting
> for him to respond.
> Do you want another account to get the censored list at?

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.  We already get the censored stuff
on the alleged-to-be "unedited" list, so by looking at the censored
list only, we can do the subtraction more reliably than Sandfort.

Just the censored list is needed, not the cut-out stuff, as far as I know.