[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

request for comment re "contributor-covenant.org"



Hey Steve,

I've never posted much to CPunks, preferring to listen when people who
now no longer post such as Peter Gutmann, John Young, Eugen Leitl,
Cathal Garvey, Griffen Boyce, and others. My first post to the cpunks
list that I've archived was in early 2010, in a discussion of Mozilla
Perspectives. That was back when the CPunks list discussed things of
that nature, rather than "racial strength," which is assuredly
crypto-white nationalism (in the "attempting to disguise" sense, not in
the "cryptographically secure" sense).

Most of the people I name above no longer post. I notice the first post
I see from you is from 2014, which might indicate you missed this period
of the cpunks list. You might want to read some of the archives from the
previous five years, rather than limiting yourself to the last six
months. This list used to be quite good and contained reasoned
discussion of a variety of technical topics. 

As for ideology, I use my real name on this list because I'm already
openly anarchist and cypherpunk in my meatspace identity and see no
reason to hide this. However, you seem confused on the nature of
anarchism. As a rejection of all forms of coercion and hierarchy,
anarchism is both implicitly and explicitly feminist, anti-racist,
anti-capitalist, and anti-imperialist. If you're still confused about
this, I suggest "Said the pot to the kettle: Feminism for anarchist
men." It's very basic, but if you find it too basic you can look at the
recommended further readings for more advanced topics. If you do
consider yourself an anarchist, I urge you to meditate on why you chose
to embrace anarchism as an ideology, and whether those reasons also
compel you to embrace feminism and anti-racism as explicitly as
anarchism. 

If you're a "libertarian," I urge you to stop using a word that
everywhere but the united states means "anarchist" in the sense I have
been using it and in the sense anarchists throughout history have used
it including but not limited to Emma Goldman, Assata Shakur, and Bill
Haywood, and instead say "neo-feudalist" which is perhaps more
appropriate. 

Cypherpunk technology always appealed to me as an anarchist because it
equalizes all people against those who would attempt to oppress them.
Technology does have the capacity to be liberating. But for that ideal
to be realized, the communities around those technologies need be at
best ideologically neutral. If a black liberationist, who should be the
ally of any anarchist, came on this list today, I'm sure she would be
dissuaded from using any actually secure technology because the tone of
this list has shifted from discussing cypherpunk technology, to "racial
strength" and arguing over whether people should have the "free speech"
right to build fascism. 

The only way this can happen is if people like you look inside yourself
and decide what side you're on. 

On Tue, 2016-02-09 at 08:44 -0500, Steve Kinney wrote:
> On 02/08/2016 09:15 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> > Hi Ted,
> > 
> > Yes, I agree with you.
> 
> As well you might:  It appears that Ted has made six posts to the
> CPunks list since June of last year.  Each consisted of complaints
> about the ideological impurity a.k.a. political incorrectness of
> the CPunks list and those who post to it.
> 
> Ted and "[email protected]" have a lot in common, including
> their vocabulary, grammatical construction, New Left ideology and
> a hostile attitude toward what passes for "native culture" on the
> CPunks list.  A few posts from years earlier suggest that Ted
> probably exists somewhere in meatspace, whereas
> [email protected] appears to exist only as a pseudonym
> created for a single purpose.
> 
> > Supposedly, this list was for anarchists who wanted to advance 
> > strong cryptography and individual liberty.
> > 
> > However, it seems like the large majority of postings here are 
> > unfortunately not about cryptography, nor anarchy.  Agreed
> > about the white fascism.
> 
> Our morally superior critic [email protected] appeared to
> come here to help us eliminate degrading, insulting and hurtful
> language on the CPunks list by installing a censorship regime.
> But now I see a New Left ideologue providing us with yet another
> demonstration that "Those who make and enforce the law are above
> the law."
> 
> Authoritarian much lately, [email protected]?  No matter:
> The CPunks list will not censor you.
> 
> > The ideal would be idea to have more code, more crypto.
> 
> Please cite examples of your contributions to the creation,
> vetting, promotion, defense of, or end user tech support for "more
> code, more crypto."
> 
> > However, as you said, it might be a lost cause. Which is quite 
> > sad, considering what it originally represented. But thanks
> > for writing this nonetheless :)
> 
> It would make sense to abandon PC trolling of the CPunks list as a
> lost cause.  Most of the participants in the CPunks list self
> identify as Anarchist or Libertarian, both of which indicate high
> sales resistance to New Left ideology.  You will not beat a crowd
> that includes veterans of USENET in open battle.  Uncommitted
> third parties do not know or care that the CPunks list exists, so
> what potentially receptive audience do you address?
> 
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Ted Smith <[email protected] 
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
> >> I'd appreciate any suggestions, onlist or offline, from
> >> anyone who thinks similarly of the ideological drift of this
> >> list from generally anti-authoritarian to crypto-white
> >> nationalism.
> 
> Racist much lately, Ted?  No matter:  The CPunks list will not
> censor you.
> 
> Several people on the list have taken the issues raised by
> shakeitoff@ghostmailseriously enough to discuss them rationally.
> "Counterfeit coins exist because there was, first, real gold."
> One should always assume good faith on the part of correspondents,
> until persuasive evidence indicates otherwise.
> 
> But apparently [email protected] and Ted want more:
> Committed ideological converts who will trash the CPunks list, an
> ongoing and rather successful experiment in free speech, by
> installing a shiny new censorship regime.  If "they" can't get
> their way, at least they can stamp their little feet and call
> people names.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Sent from Ubuntu
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20160209/68209c7f/attachment.sig>