Keep it Simple and the Cypherpunk Way

(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups:
alt.cypherpunks)


At 11:42 AM -0500 2/13/97, Derek Atkins wrote:

>Unfortunately, the messages that make it through to the cypherpunks
>list have their MessageID changed when they get approved.  So,
>checking for duplicates by MessageID fails, given the current approval
>mechanism. :(
>
>I've informed Sandy of the problem, but he doesn't know how to
>preserve the original MessageIDs.

I will phrase my message here as respectfully as possible vis-a-vis the
goals of the moderation experiment. That is, I will only deal with one
aspect, the one of _costs_ of the moderation experiment.

To wit, the _costs_ of the moderation experiment--Sandy's time, our time
spent debating moderation, and now the issues raised by Michael Froomkin
and others about dealing with the chaos of multiple, overlapping
lists--greatly exceed the relatively small amount of effort it took anyone
to simply delete the insult posts, the ASCII art posts, etc.

I respectfully submit that the huge costs incurred on several parties have
cumulatively far exceeded the minor savings of not having a handful of the
'bot-generated insults of the day and some of the ASCII art generated. As
to the "comity" of the list, the moderation experiment has clearly had just
the opposite effect, predictably. (Imposing comity is rarely easy,
especially given an independent bunch of folks who are suspicious of
moderators screening their words for evidence of non-comity!). And the ill
will generated toward certain folks has been regrettable, and vastly more
costly than any minor savings in not having to see a few messages. 

"Keep it simple, stupid," the oft-quote KISS principle.

A moderation scheme--except perhaps those run very tightly a la Peter
Neumann's RISKS list--almost always bogs down into debates about the
moderation criteria, the acceptability of certain posts, and so on. Now we
see another effect: multiple lists and a confusing array of cross-posts,
mail-to-News gateways, News-to-mail gateways, etc.

The "Cypherpunks Way" is to encourage and empower people to filter their
own stuff, or to hire outside contractors to do it for them. Failing that,
to let them twist slowly in the wind. "Think of it as evolution in action."

The Cypherpunks Way is also the simplest system.

I hope this episode has reminded us of this lesson.

--Tim May

-- 
Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,  
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets, 
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

what TCM continues to stick his head in the sand over
is the fact that the list noise levels have gotten outlandishly
out of control over recent times, far beyond anything in memory. 
what is it due to? 

it appears that there is a basic law of cyberspace that S/N decreases 
as you add more people. it seems to be a very obvious and repeatable
property.

there are some significant lessons about cryptoanarchy that are
completely evading TCM. how well does anarchy scale? apparently, not
well. TCM would like to pretend that just deleting posts and having
outsider filterers is a "solution" to the problem and argues for
business as usual, upholding the status quo.

the problem is that when you have a deteriorating situation, the
status quo is not a valid concept. keeping the status quo means
further deterioration.

TCM also fails to address the problem of AGENT PROVOCATEURS. the
cyberspace list is intensely fragile and susceptible/ vulnerable
to them as Vulis demonstrates. it only takes ONE and a lot of 
tentacles. does TCM propose a solution to this? no, of course not,
because he has a blind spot when it comes to realizing the
PATENTLY OBVIOUS FLAWS OF CRYPTOANARCHY that stare him in the face.

if cpunks had a formal way of making decisions, and some loyalty
to each other, instead of BAILING OUT at the slightest difficulty,
perhaps the situation would be different, eh? see how quickly people
who were once friends simply WALK OUT on each other in the cryptoanarchist
approach? where is the loyalty? the sense of working for the greater
good? it's gone. TCM simply ABANDONS the list at the first opportunity,
and ignores the years of hard work that J.G. has put into it.

timmy, cpunks, etc. you are getting a lesson in REALITY. you are seeing
the logical conclusion of your views playing out before you.
acrimony, bitterness, resignation, chaos, confusion, cacaphony,
anarchy.

Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
> what TCM continues to stick his head in the sand over
> is the fact that the list noise levels have gotten outlandishly
> out of control over recent times, far beyond anything in memory.
> what is it due to?

"Out of control" says it all, don't you think?  (as in "control
freaks", that is).

> it appears that there is a basic law of cyberspace that S/N decreases
> as you add more people. it seems to be a very obvious and repeatable
> property.

No, it decreases rapidly when your forum more-or-less suddenly
becomes a hot item on the web.  If it weren't hot, nobody would
bother, believe me.

> there are some significant lessons about cryptoanarchy that are
> completely evading TCM. how well does anarchy scale? apparently, not
> well. TCM would like to pretend that just deleting posts and having
> outsider filterers is a "solution" to the problem and argues for
> business as usual, upholding the status quo.

"Scale" is a term used by controllers.

> the problem is that when you have a deteriorating situation, the
> status quo is not a valid concept. keeping the status quo means
> further deterioration.

Look at the big picture.  Some people have proposed unacceptable
methods for controlling human population, and it should be no
surprise that the same mentality would pervade these forums.

> TCM also fails to address the problem of AGENT PROVOCATEURS. the
> cyberspace list is intensely fragile and susceptible/ vulnerable
> to them as Vulis demonstrates. it only takes ONE and a lot of
> tentacles. does TCM propose a solution to this? no, of course not,
> because he has a blind spot when it comes to realizing the
> PATENTLY OBVIOUS FLAWS OF CRYPTOANARCHY that stare him in the face.

Unless, of course, the forum itself (and its proponents) are
themselves the "agent provocateurs".

> if cpunks had a formal way of making decisions, and some loyalty
> to each other, instead of BAILING OUT at the slightest difficulty,
> perhaps the situation would be different, eh? see how quickly people
> who were once friends simply WALK OUT on each other in the cryptoanarchist
> approach? where is the loyalty? the sense of working for the greater
> good? it's gone. TCM simply ABANDONS the list at the first opportunity,
> and ignores the years of hard work that J.G. has put into it.

Loyalty?  Amongst anarchists?  Two points: Loyalty on c-punks was
almost entirely a negative factor (i.e., sucking up to Gilmore).
Two, Tim May is for Tim May (as he should be), and he didn't abandon
his ideals one bit, which is a helluva lot more to say for him than
Gilmore or Sandfort.

> timmy, cpunks, etc. you are getting a lesson in REALITY. you are seeing
> the logical conclusion of your views playing out before you. acrimony,
> bitterness, resignation, chaos, confusion, cacaphony, anarchy.

Perhaps you should turn your talents to writing country songs.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

on or about 970215:1003 Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net> said:

+Vladimir Z. Nuri <vznuri@netcom.com> said:

+> timmy, cpunks, etc. you are getting a lesson in REALITY. you are seeing
+> the logical conclusion of your views playing out before you. acrimony,
+> bitterness, resignation, chaos, confusion, cacaphony, anarchy.

+Perhaps you should turn your talents to writing country songs.

    and if I play it backwards I get my dawg, my truck, and my gittar back.

 ___________________________________________________________attila_____
  "Explain to me, slowly and carefully, 
    why if person A, when screwed over on a deal by B; 
    is morally obligated to consult, pay, and defer to, person C 
    for the purpose of seeing justice done; 
    and why person C has any legitimate gripe,
    if A just hauls off and smacks B around like a dead carp." 

 ___________________________________________________________attila_____
 "attila" 1024/C20B6905/23 D0 FA 7F 6A 8F 60 66 BC AF AE 56 98 C0 D7 B0

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: latin1
Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will be

iQCVAwUBMwaj+b04kQrCC2kFAQH0oAQA3pueKSWg2Fqvb6h3psP67rF18N/kwaMP
nD6LE7DgzNYVTYwwKjk/eT8/i2kdSEAS8MqkmVc7KwZqsHWl4Ttj23A1GaTHzobL
IWwfRAR6BJfcjyvQSzkG/Pq4R7FYvyLoSAqwsYLvlWvC35kiYwwjll9/zprLQbWq
RHlrPaY54EU=
=I9gB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----