> By the way, boys, I apologize in advance, but in throwing away the naughty > French version of Reliable, and going back to the good old American > version, I neglected to say that I make no representations as to the length > of time that will pass before I again embrace the delectable French > Reliable.
> If I see too many instances of nastiness showing up on the net, I may feel > the need to jump back in and start monitoring again; blocking follows from > that ('censorship' to the Shyster); and after that, making known the id of > the scumbags responsible. It goes without saying that more sophisticated > monitoring will follow: keyword searches of content; monitoring the input > to the remailer, etc., etc.
> I can say that I will never jeopardize or invade the privacy of legitimate > users, but people I suspect of being in the scumbag catergory, and it is I > who must decide who is or is not a scumbag, have, in my humble opinion, no > right to privacy: I will track them down like the skunks they are.
> And, yes, I think that content is something that must be looked at, and > when it is found to fall into the scumbag category (according to my > judgement), may and will be used to censor the post: I will not (I mean, > possibly, and in the future) allow Eelbash to be used as a conduit for > every species of filth).
> At the moment I don't have to tools to do the job properly: a keyword > search program is needed, but when I do, the temptation to use it may be > overwhelming.
> Please note that none of this is the case now: I am simply reserving the > right to do it at some time in the future.
> Think about it: American society has become so degraded that 'motherfucker' > is now a term of endearment! Unfortunately, the US seems to have a large > influence on other Western countries, and I don't doubt that 'motherfucker' > is also a term of endearment in many other nations, or is at least > considered a benign word of greeting and reference.
> Do you want the remailers to be a part of this? Do you want to lie down > with the lice and get lousy, or do you want to apply the bug spray of > monitoring and censorship to destroy the little bastards?
> Even if you are one of the lice, remailers that follow such an > irresponsible course will, eventually, bring down the wrath of the public > and politicians, and end up legislated out of existence.
> Of course, remailers are klunky, and something like Publius, or WOF, will > probaby soon replace them.; I'm not sure how they work, but have the > feeling it will become more difficult for right-minded operators to do > their good work. That will probably hasten the demise of Publius and WOF, > along with all other remailers.
eelbash-ad...@excite.com wrote: > And, yes, I think that content is something that must be looked at, and > when it is found to fall into the scumbag category (according to my > judgement), may and will be used to censor the post: I will not (I mean, > possibly, and in the future) allow Eelbash to be used as a conduit for > every species of filth). [...] > Think about it: American society has become so degraded that 'motherfucker' > is now a term of endearment! Unfortunately, the US seems to have a large > influence on other Western countries, and I don't doubt that 'motherfucker' > is also a term of endearment in many other nations, or is at least > considered a benign word of greeting and reference.
Dearest motherfucker,
Perhaps you could be more explicit as to what, according to your judgement, falls into the 'scumbag category.' I can conceive of a reasonable standard -- libel, kiddie-porn, spam-baiting maybe...
I sure as fuck hope you don't count obscenity as a species of filth worthy of your time to scan and filter. You'll be so swamped, you'll be forced to shut down your service due to exhaustion, (to say nothing of the barrage of obscenities directed at you, personally, that will inevitably follow.)
Not that I believe the end justifies your means, but if you should yield to the temptation to censor, you really ought to make clear what sort of content you will not propagate. (Unless, of course, your real intent is not to block filth but to reveal its purveyors -- in which case, I can tell you who is the scumbag).
Your Intractably Squiggly Motherfucker, I. Squiggly
In article <7I814U6I36713.848587...@anonymous.poster>, eelbash- ad...@excite.com says...
> My apolgies again for misleading you, perhaps.
Ok, one of the following scenarios is true:
Someone compromised your key. Someone compromised your server. Someone compromised your excite account. You got bashed for caving in and have decided to turn around. Being on the front of Usenet has taken your sanity.
I lean towards the last because I know what it is like...
/steve -- Stephen K. Gielda http://www.cotse.com The Church of the Swimming Elephant Have you gone to church today?
> I neglected to say that I make no representations as to the length > of time that will pass before I again embrace the delectable French > Reliable.
> If I see too many instances of nastiness showing up on the net, I may feel
the need to jump back in and start monitoring again; blocking follows from that ('censorship' to the Shyster);
> monitoring will follow: keyword searches of content; monitoring the input>
to the remailer, etc., etc. and it is I> who must decide who is or is not a scumbag, have, in my humble opinion, no right to privacy: I will track them down like the skunks they are. And, yes, I think that content is something that must be looked at, and when it is found to fall into the scumbag category (according to my judgement), may and will be used to censor the post: > At the moment I don't have to tools to do the job properly: a keyword search program is needed, but when I do, the temptation to use it may be overwhelming.
Simply amazing. I don't believe you can make a post like the above and have any hope of continuing to function as anything but a marginal re-mailer at best. And that is subject to how many right wing conservative Christians make use of re-mailers, I'm afraid. For God's sake, YOU get to decide what is and isn't "appropriate" for the internet. That shows an utter disregard for the specific principles with which re-mailers and re-mailing networks were established.
Unbelieveable! The above post could only have been made by someone with absolutely NO intellectual understanding of the concept of right to privacy, free speech, or various constituional protections which should be afforded to individuals entrusting their communications to a third party purporting to be acting as a legitimate agent for same. The damned phone company is less invasive and restrictive as you would desire to be in your "ideal" world. Whether you view your fucntion as a remailer as work or play, I do not know - but clearly you are in the wrong business, my friend. Perhaps you should get your resume updated - never know when some third world country will be shopping for it's next dictator. Good luck with your next venture, whatever it turns out to be.
On Fri, 7 Jul 2000 02:03:21 -0400, "Dan" <n...@one.com> wrote: >Simply amazing. I don't believe you can make a post like the above >and have any hope of continuing to function as anything but a >marginal re-mailer at best. And that is subject to how many right >wing conservative Christians make use of re-mailers, I'm afraid. For >God's sake, YOU get to decide what is and isn't "appropriate" for >the internet. That shows an utter disregard for the specific >principles with which re-mailers and re-mailing networks were >established.
Heh I'm a right-wing conservative Christian. Southern Baptist, even, and I preach several times a month. And yep, I'm the guy who ran piratech remailer. And I completely disagree with eelbash.
Why is that? What's to guarantee that some do-gooder like this decides that my views are too oppressive or offensive or whatever and decides to filter em out? The same the protects your views from him: Nothing.
We can't pick and choose who should remain protected. At times I admit that I wish we could; I'd love to be able to get rid of a lot of the crap on the internet that I think is flat wrong. But guess what: I can't do that without endangering myself. I'll debate ya in a heartbeat, but I won't try to say you don't have as much right to speak your mind as I do.
In alt.privacy.anon-server, eelbash-ad...@excite.com wrote: >*** PGP Signature Status: good >*** Signer: eelbash <eelb...@bigfoot.com> >*** Signed: 7/6/00 7:14:17 PM >*** Verified: 7/6/00 9:19:06 PM >*** BEGIN PGP VERIFIED MESSAGE ***
>By the way, boys, I apologize in advance, but in throwing away the naughty >French version of Reliable, and going back to the good old American >version, I neglected to say that I make no representations as to the length >of time that will pass before I again embrace the delectable French >Reliable.
>If I see too many instances of nastiness showing up on the net, I may feel >the need to jump back in and start monitoring again; blocking follows from >that ('censorship' to the Shyster); and after that, making known the id of >the scumbags responsible. It goes without saying that more sophisticated >monitoring will follow: keyword searches of content; monitoring the input >to the remailer, etc., etc.
<snip insanity>
Is my PGP broken? Did you loose control of your key and passphrase? Did you really write this while sober? Is this supposed to be humorous and I don't get it?
Damn... See all those holes in your foot? You shot them there yourself.
You, sir, may make a good crusader, upholder of the public morals or the like. However, I don't think you will ever make a remailer operator.
I would recomend that you save yourself the grief and heartache and shutdown. If you really insist on continuing to try, please, run as pgponly and middle.
>[...] I'm not sure how they work, but have the >feeling it will become more difficult for right-minded operators to do >their good work.
iQEVAwUBOWV1CMFvBSQaVCgHAQGBpwf/TdV3K/P1qcWB5jop3tGHPhVPQI2XRS7H VQZf8RcP4c6SaT5LLZTPzzRhKl64cJj3Acnqw2352Rl5c24EZx6o/lYZH64r3mHN HQp8esqFz5Wl97XklDCE7n53AIsBYqwtdXF+Ud4rxz1/5n+qg2Nn99rBLzilJB0x /40fFyfxEz70AdWGhleEqeOLREYy8WKp5AuafCmHtnWEp7ZYst0r/0LRbi/ugIiH ++YMTqxyLWbntHlXrvt3RHbLfbENmWfUWcvfIKKGPuf4Q1+SiyM7Dk2c2+JhWkP+ 2qltGw3zw8q9/+3p/QMOZxvgTXe7gdxiCneajZNfLNBxsiGTOSEJzQ== =yzT5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services. Any address shown in the From header is unverified.
> Heh I'm a right-wing conservative Christian. Southern Baptist, > even, and I preach several times a month. And yep, I'm the guy who > ran piratech remailer. And I completely disagree with eelbash.
Well, I didn't mean to offend you, not that you sound as I have. I guess I was just at a loss after reading that post and fell into using a silly cliche'. While not right-wing, I am a Christian and rather conservative and DO very much believe in free speech even for those I would disagree with very strongly. Just letting you know there was no offense meant and it was just the laziness of relying on a cliche that led to the reference.
Anonymous Sender <nob...@noisebox.dhs.org> wrote: >> Do you want the remailers to be a part of this?
In a phrase: Fuck yes. You really have missed the point if you don't understand the need for offensive speech.
>> Do you want to lie down >> with the lice and get lousy, or do you want to apply the bug spray of >> monitoring and censorship to destroy the little bastards?
I have no desire to throw the baby out with the bath water. Your analogy is more like spray agent orange on the jungle. Everything dies. No one wins.
If you really do believe this, and this message is not a troll or a forgery, then you don't understand the purpose of either remailers or freedom of speech. Speech is not supposed to be nice. Its not supposed to be "scumbag" free or non-offensive.
>> Of course, remailers are klunky, and something like Publius, or WOF, will >> probaby soon replace them.; I'm not sure how they work, but have the >> feeling it will become more difficult for right-minded operators to do >> their good work.
I think you mean wrong-minded operators. And yes, thats the point of WOF and other new models. To prevent censorship.
On Fri, 7 Jul 2000 03:25:35 -0400, "Dan" <n...@one.com> wrote:
...
>Well, I didn't mean to offend you, not that you sound as I have. I >guess I was just at a loss after reading that post and fell into >using a silly cliche'. While not right-wing, I am a Christian and >rather conservative and DO very much believe in free speech even for >those I would disagree with very strongly. Just letting you know >there was no offense meant and it was just the laziness of relying >on a cliche that led to the reference.
Heh you didn't offend me. I tell people I'm too dumb to be offened with someone insults me directly, much less indirectly.
Just wanted to make the point that pretty much every opinion is unpopular somewhere. And in some places you can get killed for having unpopular opinions, and in many many more you can lose your job, freedom, etc. Like China, where not too long ago they decided to tear down some churches because they weren't "official," meaning they didn't clear everything with the government. It's things like that that prompted me to set up a remailer in the first place, to try to help people communicate freely.
Another example: I actually had a guy email me, surprised that I was a ham radio operator and ran a remailer. He tried telling me that all hams are responsible and a remailer goes against their ethics or something. Heh I know better; my uncle is in charge of the repeaters in the Savannah area so I know how many idiots out there abuse the things, sometimes doing illegal things (not unpopular -- illegal, like conducting business which is not allowed on ametuer frequencies). I wrote back about that and never heard from him again.
The fact of the matter is that some people are too stupid to handle freedom properly. But that doesn't mean we should do away with it because some people are stupid. If that was the case no one would be allowed to drive here in Savannah...
