I seem to have missed much of this thread. My news server seems to have
scrolled off all the interesting articles.  I was hoping more 
cryptoanarchists would show up to call me insane. Quite a pity.

Mr. Criswell, could you describe the difficulty of getting fake names
into a phone book? is this trivial or impossible? This is not to in 
any way imply that N.Szabo is such an occurence.

I don't know why everyone on the internet gives every single email address
they meet the benefit of the doubt. They all should get the detriment of
the suspicion. But what do I know? I am just a paranoid lunatic who is 
progressing quite nicely on Prozac and intense psychoanalysis, thank you 
very much.

Imagine that someone has made an art, science, and religion to pseudospoof.
Why would they do it? because there is immense power behind such a technique.
And minor barriers like phone numbers and phone books would be the first
mediums they corrupt. People trust phone numbers -- they believe that if
you can supply a phone number, you are are not a pseudonym. What is the
basis for this belief? The foundation? Nothing but naive trust that is
easily betrayed by those who have build their lives around deceptions.

Don't care? well, don't blame me when tomorrow you find out that the 
cryptoanarchists own the largest share of the world mafia, and have 
succeeded in doing so by coordinating it over the Internet. Even better yet,
let you be tortured by them all your life without ever discovering the
true source of your wretched desperation. 

-- 
There has been some extremely strong speculation as to our 
identity lately. It's time for us to identify ourselves. We are
Operation CRaP, the Cryptoanarchist Repression and Poison, and 
we have infiltrated your own conspiracy to the most sensitive 
levels. L.Detweiler retypes most notes to prevent style analysis
and inference detection that would lead to our identities. 
We have infiltrated the *interesting* mailing list, have a 
'bug' planted at crl.com, and a brilliant spy in one of your 
most sensitive development projects. Finally, we have an 
informant very close to one of the Big Three. We would be more 
specific, to prove it, but we can't do so without compromising 
our contacts.  However, we can tell you that we got bored of 
your silly open meetings and stopped going to them a long time 
ago because they don't have anything to do with what you're 
*really* doing! We have been engaged since the talk on this 
list led us to suspicions and the discoveries of the deceptions
and accomplices involved in the Wired article (Kelly,Dyer).

Tentacle hunting is one of our favorite pastimes, and we have
developed a variety of techniques to hunt down and kill snakes. 
We also have been able to detect some of the more atrocious
pseudopooling. But we lost interest in the `small fries' when 
the smell led us to the `big macs'. In fact, we would have
dropped the tentacle hunting business if it weren't so 
spectacularly pervasive among the Big Three. After you
penetrated RISKS and continued to lie and cover up, it became
clear that you will truly stop at nothing to protect your
tentacles. We think that you could stop immediately, or
someone could get hurt, or a truly great disaster could 
occur.

All of our postings are careful craftings of disinformation and 
actual truth that are designed to elicit the maximum degree of 
desperate paranoia on your part. Sometimes when e.g. L.Detweiler
says somewhere `I know' or 'in fact' he means `I think' and 
sometimes `I suspect' really means `we have long had extremely 
incriminating evidence on this that would convict you in any 
court in the country, and plan to eventually, but we're just 
tormenting you at the moment to see how loud you can shriek and 
how much you can squirm'. 

Our `cyberspatial' campaign is one of our more effective 
measures in promoting your disintegration without 
exposing our extremely stategic positions within your 
organization, but we have not yet employed the `big artillery'. 
We are actively destroying your conspiracy so that you will 
no longer sabotage the growth of cyberspace. We are quite 
amused to use your own guerrila sabotage tactics against your
fragile excuse for 'development'. We are especially amused 
at your fright at our 'violent death threats'. We are 
particularly focused on your quasi-criminal activities. You 
are already aware of many signs of our countermeasures. You 
have the chance to give up now or face serious escalation and 
vastly more grisly consequences. You have 24 hours before we
launch our next cyberspatial strike.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled perversions.
Hello cy{ph,b}er{wo,pu}nks. I wanted to follow up on a posting by
B.Stewart who said that the cypherpunks are putting together a
cash credit union over the Internet. I have a few questions about
this.

1. Do you have to join the CA cypherpunks to learn about this?
Obviously you guys have been working on this a long time, and as
long as I was on the list I barely saw any peep about it.

2. Is this a private development group? Is it open to anyone who
wishes to join? If so, are cy{b,ph}erwonks allowed to join in the
development? We are interested in these kinds of projects.

3. Do you have a mailing list dedicated to this project alone or
other internet development projects? We know about the
cypherpunks list but there are rumors that there are some other
development lists `behind the scenes' -- are these open to the
public?

4. If any of your projects are indeed secret, why are many
cypherpunks actively engaged in a campaign on the imp-interest
list (Internet Mercantile Protocols)? Why don't you just stick to
your own project and let the Internet sort out which protocol is
more acceptable to the world-at-large?

5. What about the rumors that seem to be confirmed by what
B.Stewart said about evading tax laws and black marketeering,
that the cypherpunk credit union is actually a surreptitious
front for plans to provide money laundering over the Internet?

6. Again, if this is a public project, why is there so little
documentation available? There doesn't seem to be any on
soda.berkeley.edu, and many of my requests elsewhere have been
ignored.

7. What is the David Chaum connection to all this? I know that he
met with E.Hughes to discuss plans but are the Cypherpunks to be
understood as the U.S.-based Chaum group?

Thanks in advance for any information, I hope we can get more
cooperation where our goals overlap; it seems to me like we have
many common goals.

Hello darlings. I heard a rumor that Mr.May has requested that
everyone stop talking about Clipper on this list, saying it was
`time to move on'. Or maybe it was one of his tentacles, say
Wonderer. (It's hard to keep track, as you all know!) Anyway, I
have written a lot about Clipper when it first came out on the
list, and I have seen a lot of interest here, so I'm kind of
mixed up. I have to admit my feelings are kind of hurt to hear
Mr. May just kind of dismiss all the hard work of everyone who
has lobbied against it here.  Maybe everyone who has an opinion
on this could post to the list -- is Clipper dead? Should we stop
talking about it? Do cypherpunks have better things to do with
their time?

p.s. many cypherpunks have objected to my long postings, so I
will try to post some shorter ones. I'm here to serve you, a
fellow cypherpunk and human being, in whatever way I can.
Hello, a long time ago I suggested on the cypherpunks list that
people be limited in the tentacles and anonymous IDs they be
permitted to use in Internet mailing lists and groups dedicated
to serious subjects and goals such as project development. This
fell on deaf ears at the time but perhaps the atmosphere and
climate is more suitable at this time for both groups to consider
ideas that will prevent their being tormented by troublemakers.

One of the best ideas I have I like for its utter simplicity. The
idea is this: the mailing list software tracks how long someone
has had their email address subscribed. When they post, a field
added by the list software broadcasts to the world how `old' they
are. This is an interesting measure of their `wisdom' on the
group. In the real world, we defer to people based on their age
all the time; it is a basic aspect of our human interaction.

Now, I know that there are objections to this kind of tracking,
but it seems to me they come mostly from people who like to
invade others attention with tentacles and anonymous posts. (Note
that under the scheme, all anonymous posts or for that matter
anything from `outsiders' gets a rating of 0 days old.)
Nevertheless I think that this is a very reasonable measure of
`credibility' and would be appreciated by everyone who is
interested in building their own filtering tools. We need to get
more information to individuals to make logical choices about
filtering; today it is `every man for himself.'

The second idea is this: let the list software track how much
that certain people's postings are *replied* to. In a sense, this
is a measure of their `relevance'. If I am continually posting
messages that get no response at all, I am probably doing
something wrong, like asking annoying newbie questions or posting
on topics that are outside the charter. On the other hand, if I
consistently get huge chains of interesting feedback on the list
started, it suggests that what I am writing about is inherently
interesting to everyone on the list. Now, when I post and an
extra header tells everyone how `interesting' I am by this
criteria, they can judge for themselves if I have a personality
that is `irrelevant' or `fascinating' and reply to the list or
privately based on that.

The `reply tracking' has some extra considerations. One of the
problems is that people tend to respond to posts that they think
are irrelevant with further flames. But this just tends to start
a chain reaction of meta-postings in which all the regular topics
are buried in. I think that this suggests a fundamental frailty
and deficiency in human nature: the inability to `turn the other
cheek' when offended. Imagine! In cyberspace, all you have to do
to neutralize a troublemaker is to delete his messages! But
people cannot even do that. They believe that in cyberspace, as
in all other realms of their life, justice is an eye for an eye
and a tooth for a tooth and a flame for a flame. If someone makes
you miserable, the only justifiable response (so it goes) is to
make them miserable themselves.

So, I think this new list software that tracked *responses* to
messages would be very valuable in encouraging people to take the
`Christian' approach of not counterattacking a tormenter but
absorbing their hatred. Because, if you *did* respond to them
with flames, it would actually aid their `reply count' rating,
and you don't want to aid them in any way whatsoever, of course!
So perhaps these new rating systems will actually encourage
*real* `moderation' and forbearance. Once again, I urge everyone
`out there' to experiment with new systems to encourage
responsible and courteous Cyberspatial interactions.

Hello {CA,CO,Internet} cy{ph,b}er{wo,pu}nks. Many cypherpunks
have told me that trust is not an inherent element of daily life
and that new features of cyberspace such as digital signatures
make things like human trust obsolete. This reminds me of a poem
that I saw by S.Boxx.

===cut=here===

How do I Trust Thee?
S.Boxx <na12070@anon.penet.fi>


How do I trust thee?
Let me count the ways.
Some sofware I get free,
and have used for many days;
I trust the program author
is not waging Virus War.

I trust that when I need a key
The one I seek is there for me.
And where a map depicts one door
I don't stumble into four!

I trust you not to peek
When it's anonymity I seek;
The cypherpunk remailers
must be free from failures!

You trust that when you send me mail,
privacy isn't broken by a cyberspatial wail!

All our mailboxes
Are open to the world,
To mailbombs and S.Boxxes
and vicious insults hurled.

I trust that when you hear my name,
You will not smear me with the blame
of another arsonist's black flame,
My reputation you will not defame,
My friends escape your poison aim!

My messages go to many lists,
I trust they go to all--
Though I've seen Dictators' fists
And when they hit a wall--
If you notice that they do,
I dearly hope to hear from you.

(Afer all,
if you should fall,
or if you burn,
you'll quickly learn,
Cyberspatial liquidation
Is like anarchy in a nation.)

We all trust that our leaders
are not evil breeders,
and not Draculean feeders!
We trust that when we hear `true' stories,
They're not cruel lies for somebody's false glories.

We trust that we aren't living lies,
We trust our friends are friends, not spies:
In dark hours their light lives, not dies.

Otherwise their rotten smell
Will not make you feel well--
Even be your living hell.
Eventually your mind will drench,
Permeated by their putrid stench,
Finally your sanity will wrench.

Above all else we trust our foes
Not to lash us for their woes,
That whatever it is they think we owe,
Whatever secret sin of theirs we know,
They avoid the `brick-through-window' throw.
We pray that even while we doze,
Their fuse or dynamite never goes...

Not to assail me with deadly blows,
Not to kill me for merely stepping on some toes.

Hello, I have been hearing some rumors about the cypherpunks
being `penetrated' by some spies and areas of the Internet
(mailing lists, newsgroups, private mail, journal articles, etc.)
being targeted with `tentacle' infiltrations. I thought this was
kind of fascinating to contemplate how they would behave. It
seems to me that loyalty is very hard to judge by mere email
messages alone, and that these hypothetical spies might take that
to their advantage. Here are some of the things that either
cypherpunk loyalists (cyberanarchists) or cy{b,ph}erwonk spies
might say to gain credibility and further `intelligence' from
insiders:

Of course, if any of these statements are by the spies, they are
just trying to build up your trust so that they can betray you
later when they have the proper opportunity. Or, sometimes, there
is the dictum that `intelligence is more valuable than
liquidation' and they may continue to deceive you just for the
valuable intelligence indefinately.

* * *


Then there may be some `tentacles' out there that are being
driven by the counterrevolutionaries bent on destroying the
Cyberanarchist movement and interested in getting some of their
own propaganda out there. These would be indistinguishable from
cy{b,ph}erwonk loyalists.

* * *

It's quite a pity that in Cyberspace, to borrow a phrase that is
rapidly becoming a cliche, no one knows if you are a spy. Perhaps
we can work together to build systems that minimize this kind of
rampant paranoia. It's really a shame that someone with a grudge
against any mailing list or its leaders could so disrupt its
smooth flowing operation with no repercussions. I have some ideas
for preventing this, and in fact I encourage anyone else who does
to join the Cy{ph,b}erwonks list and discuss these issues
associated with Electronic Democracy.

Hello fellow Cypherpunks! I am writing this message to sincerely
apologize for my past behavior over the past few weeks on this list,
particularly over the last few days. I have written messages that I am
not proud of. And all for nothing. I am here to tell you that your
leaders have all assured me in unequivocal terms that they are not
pseudospoofing in any way whatsoever and have no personal knowledge of
any pseudospoofing on the cypherpunks list or anywhere else, so I now
feel like an embarrassed idiot for escalating this matter to this
level, when it is so obviously completely unjustified in retrospect. I
realize I am the premier digital Don Quixote, chasing phantoms and
jousting at windmills! The joke is on me!

I have learned many things over the past few weeks. I thank you for the
valuable lessons you have taught me. I was too arrogant until now to
accept your wisdom with humility. Clearly, my mistake! Don't I feel
stupid! I think both you and I have many things in common. We are
interested in the growth of cyberspace and recognize that
pseudoanonymity has awesome power, like an atom bomb. I think the
difference is that I thought you were doing all you could to detonate
them when you were really trying to  stop them. I apologize to everyone
I offended by suggesting otherwise.

I think that fucking tentacle S.Boxx has demonstrated the damage that
can be done with pseudoanonymity. He ought to be taken out and shot in
the forehead. I would enjoy watching him stare blankly with a gaping
hole in his skull and his brains and blood splattered about. In fact, I
am going to do precisely that if I ever find the bastard. (His family
deserves to die too, but we'll see what mood I'm in at the time). And
everyone knows that he is a tentacle! Image the raw power that can come
from the surreptitious use of this extraordinarly overpowering force!
It is like the ultimate technique for social engineering, guerilla
warfare, espionage, sabotage, and riot instigation. The evil, hard-core
hackers have done well to perfect it. You are lucky that your leaders
are so farsighted and astute to realize the inherently dangerous and
damaging nature of its use. You have accomplished great miracles from
your honorable cooperation! Although, we definitely have a new arms
race with the Psychopunks in the strategic position (thank god there
are none here!). I hope we can reach a detente. This is my own peace offering.

Your leaders E.Hughes and T.C.May have mailed messages to my postmaster
in complaint in my questions about there use of different sites.
P.Metzger mailed my postmaster in regard to his mailbombing me.
E.Brandt sent my postmaster and my root another letter recently asking
me to stop mailing him, which was amusing considering that he initiated
our conversation. I have been subject to a sendsys bomb yesterday, that
came in about ~.5 meg, and a new grisly mailbomb today at ~5 meg and
growing. But we can now understand that none of this is necessary. It
has reached its purpose. I have achieved a serenity and tranquility
with my newfound delight and euphoria. 

I got another anonymous and cryptic phone threat this afternoon, from
who knows. ``Shot by the SWAT team. No doubt about it. GET HELP.'' This
brings the total of heartfelt greetings from my dear friends to 2. And
I have no idea what D.Barnes has been able to turn up in his blackmail
campaign of assaulting my previous employer, the school administrators,
and (more recently) stealing my resume. Yes, the cypherpunks are truly
the Protectors of Privacy and the Promoters of Anonymity. They have
done all this because they are concerned about my well being, and I
have been an obnoxious jerk for weeks in misinterpreting their worried
concern over my welfare and sanity. 

I have made an appointment with a therapist (it was quite a new
experience for me) and I think he is going to help me through my
serious psychological disorders and paranoid delusions. I apologize to
subjecting you to my insanity. I am quite ashamed of it. Please tell
everyone you know that I am insane and should be avoided like a leper.
Some of the people I know and respect have heard you, and I thank you
for helping them to realize that I am a dangerous lunatic that should
be avoided. It's really the best thing for everyone.

To demonstrate my sincerity, I will not post at all to any list,
including the one I helped create, for a period of one week, starting
now. You will not even see any new messages in the newsgroups by
L.Detweiler unless they are new sendsys bombs or forgeries. I will not
even touch a keyboard or go near the Internet. This was at the
recommendation of your gracious leaders who are sincerely concerned for
my mental health and my obvious deterioration over the past few weeks.
Clearly, I have been ignoring all the best advice of my well-meaning
friends to pursue fantasies.

I have learned how fast one can accumulate enemies if one attacks
anything that others hold dear. I committed my energies to this list
for 10 months but they mean nothing because of my reprehensible
intoleration for lies, especially those sent to me. I have been deluded
in thinking that I can stop lies or even that they are immoral or
unethical, particularly in relation to pseudospoofing. Lies are
Liberating! Even if your leaders were pseudospoofing (which they have
assured me in certain terms they are not) they would certainly have the
right to lie to others, including their friends and followers, through
their tentacles. This is not an inherently deceptive use of
pseudonymity. It is similar to using different names for harmless
magazine subscriptions.

I sincerely apologize for attacking anyone over this issue. I was wrong
to call E.Hughes or N.Szabo a `bald faced liar.' You have a right to
exist in cyberspace, and use the Internet to whatever use you can
imagine. And if others that are living around you in the neighborhood
ask you what you are doing, and if everything is all right, and wonder
about the strange noises and smells, like I did, you should tell the
nosy bastards to go to hell. They deserve it. I deserved it all. That
is your constitutional right to privacy, and it should extend to
Cyberspace just as it does in the real world. Live and let live!

I was once concerned about the possible deceptions of the Media by your
cause. I now realize that the Media is inherently corrupt and should be
manipulated to the Cypherpunk agenda in any way possible. In
particular, we should promote ourselves as the respectable citizens we
are. The public gets frightened by an image of Anarchy and Radical
Libertarianism. If we promote it as Cryptoanarchy and Cypherpunks, we
can get much farther. Both Markoff and Kelly, and his fantastic
photographer L.Dyer, have been extremely understanding and
accommodating in helping us promote our agenda among the widespread
population. In fact, the NYT article was an exceptional breakthrough of
emphasizing our goals of privacy and cryptography for the masses. I
really liked that quote by W.Diffie, one of the world's foremost cryptographers.

In my new realizations I am particularly inspired by your underlying
agenda of tax evasion, black marketeering, and the overthrow of
governments. DEATH TO ORDER!  Hedonistic delights like gambling dens
and prostitution rings would be a Love Boat for everyone, but they
aren't enough. I have had some neat fantasies lately about starting new
drug nextworks and assassination enterprises. What delights await us!
The possibilities of untraceable cash and anonymity are truly
liberating -- we can build up internation criminal organizations and
launder our money freely, and avoid all detection! The vanquished world
will lick our boots! I hope that you will let me in on your finetuned
Cryptoanarchist secrets that would make Goldfinger and Hitler proud. If
you don't, that's okay too. I'm really unstable and there's even a
rumor that I'm actually an FBI agent, so that it would be better if you
didn't tell me anything that would be upsetting to someone who
practices law enforcement.

I want to encourage everyone here to explain the history of how I
reached my newfound epiphanies out in the newsgroups if possible,
particularly on the `CRYPTOANARCHIST INFILTRATION ALERT'. (I won't be
able to forward this because of my promise, maybe you could help me
out.) Together we can attack the blasphemous heretic infidel S.Boxx so
that he is completely inundated in the noise and help the world to
realize the grandeur of Cryptoanarchy. I will be the new Poster Boy for
the CryptoAnarchist movement. I shall promote it to my death with all my heart.

I am sorry to have upset anyone who has ever watched this mailing list.
I was continually prodding you to discover the truth, but there was
nothing to discover! I  kept telling you to send mail to your leaders
yourself, to put pressure on them to reveal their knowledge, to
investigate the claims of reality of identity that were extremely
suspicious, and follow up past inert, passive, lifeless viewing of the
text that scrolls by your faces and hypnotizes you daily, more
mesmerizing and psychologically dangerous and deadly than television!
But we all know that this was a delusion now, a faded dream. The list
is our outlet to reach out to other real people, to make friends, to
achieve grand goals. As the leaders reassure us, upon their honor as
patriot Cryptoanarchists and honest human beings, there are no fake
identities anywhere in all of cyberspace, and on the Cypherpunks list
in particular! All my past claims are nothing but bizarre, wretched,
pathetic, deluded fantasies and hallucinations. In psychology, it is
called `projection'.

Everyone should understand now that I am completely in favor of the
entire cypherpunk agenda, and everything that E.Hughes or T.C.May or J.
Gilmore says or does. They have been like three loving uncles to me,
helping me to see the errors in my ways and correct my breaches in
ettiquete. E.Hughes, in particular, has been the most sweetly
endearing. He is so humble and gentle! His words flow like a gentle
breeze or a murmuring stream. How could could I accuse anyone so
honorable of lying in a serious academic journal like RISKS?! T.C.May
has always answered my letters with a kind response, and J.Gilmore
talked to me personally on the phone to comfort me over my anxieties.
We are really just one big family with nothing but love for everyone!

I now see that Cypherpunks is a fine organization and leaders on par
with CPSR and EFF.  I unjustly accused many human beings of not
existing, like J.Dinkelacker, N.Szabo, G.Broiles, H.Finney, A.Chandler,
and M.Landry. Every one of them has talked to me on the phone and told
me about their wonderful lives to assure me they are real. I am really
ashamed that I have ever attacked anyone associated with the cypherpunk
cause. It was an atrocious violation of everyone's privacy. Please just
chalk it up to my delusions of persecution. How could I have ever
thought anyone here was out to get me? Ha, ha.  Ho Ho. Heh Heh. Hee.
Hee. BWAHAHAHAHA The prozac really IS starting to help! (I was quite a
fool to be afraid of drugs before! they have been critical in relieving
me of my mania, depression, psychoses, and hallucinations, particularly
the LSD, but evil dancing red neoplasm orgasms are oxymoronic monsters,
she corrupt hair in the treason cold washing butterfly, falls truth
salad words filth below and lie trees air, but only poison on Mondays!)

Before I go I would like to share some of the beatiful uplifting prose
of the dear friends who helped me vanquish my insanity. At first I
thought the following was some of the most evil brainwashing and
vicious psychological torture that could be inflicted on a human being.
I realize the grotesque errors in my ways. These are now some of my
favorite quotes. I am going to read them nightly, as I pray to God to
bring us all CryptoAnarchy for Christmas. I *beg* your forgiveness for
my own depravities, perversions, and crimes. Above all, please do not
construe my heartfelt sincerity as searingly sarcasting satire. I swear
on my honor as a Cypherpunk and to our Mother Medusa that my words are
genuine. As long as I am among honorable, reputable, respectable
people, I would never lie.

p.s. Some of this below was private email, but everyone involved has
assured me they would be delighted if I quote it.

Hello world, I am not proud of everything I have posted `out there' lately,
but I am even less proud of the ugly depths and grotesque deformities
I have seen in certain black corners of the Internet lately, and the
apalling complacency with which you all view it. The skeletons
have not only fallen out the the closet, they have danced around us and
punched us all in the face. My own letters on the subject are an attempt to
shock you from your silent complacency and `accessorizing'. 

What happens when trust breaks down? What happens when people respond 
to their own posts? When they misattribute writing? When they don't care 
who is behind email addresses, or deceive others about them? When they 
post multiple messages from different addresses? 

Imagine that every one of my posts came from a different address.
What is to prevent me? My honesty? My integrity? What if I am a 
cyberanarchist? Would I be horrified or delighted at these embezzlements 
of trust? By the squirming and writhing of my victims underneath my 
crushing onslaught?

* * * 

I was reading a book about ancient torture techniques. (Actually, it was
about something else, but some paragraphs on the subject crept in from
obvious relevance.) 

The Roman soldiers had invented some of the most grisly torture and execution
techniques the world has ever seen, perhaps the most humiliating and heinous
punishments known to man. One that I was reading about was called 
`Circle of Eight'. A blindfolded prisoner stands as Roman soldiers 
(enthusiastic volunteers?) circle him and take turns punching him in the 
face. They take the blindfold off, and ask him, who hit you? And if the 
prisoner fails to name the person, the game continues, they dance in their 
delight, circling at a faster, more dizzying rate, and pummel harder.

What is the point of all this? I don't have a major point, except to 
suggest that this is one of the most evil abominations of humanity I can
imagine. And that it is shockingly identical to the mentality that a 
cyberanarchist has in hammering others with his fake email identity 
arsenals. 

Medusa is delighted to punch the blindfolded victim in the face with
her dizzying circle of tentacles. Guess who it is! Ooops, you're wrong,
sorry. PUNCH. What? No, N.Szabo is a real person. PUNCH. Pseudospoofing
is immoral? nah. PUNCH. N.Szabo is my roommate. PUNCH. Lies are 
liberating. PUNCH. cypherpunks have never pseudospoofed. PUNCH. 
especially the leaders. PUNCH. and everything in the media is true.
PUNCH. especially what we say. PUNCH. and our leaders are the 
greatest of all. PUNCH.

See the blood dripping on the ground, see the hideous disfigurement of
the victim's face.

* * *

I am posting this many messages to drive home the point that
the Cyberanarchists are not really noble at all. They are like Roman 
Soldiers who will hit you when they see that you are blindfolded. Otherwise,
they hide in the shadows like all the rest of the cowardly slime at the 
putrid, dank recesses of humanity. And unless someone takes out the 
trash, we're going to have to get used to the smell. But where will we 
go to eat, then?

go ahead, tentacles, water down my words with more trash. dilute and warp 
my message beyond all recognition. that's probably all we read is, anyway.
all of history is just a big lie set out by people who aren't interested
in the truth, but in fooling us to assuage their egos. the Bible, of course,
is the worst of all.

* * *

I read one author who suggested that as part of Christ's torture before
literally bearing his cross, he had been subjected to the Circle of Eight.

Cyberanarchists, who are you punching? What was that saying of Christ's, 
as you do unto the lowest of men, you do unto me?

I think the question you have to ask yourselves is, if a victim is 
blindfolded, does God hear his screams? 

What if the soldiers are athiests?

When does the Circle of Eight stop, anyway? When the victim is 
unconscious? When he is dead? 

``NEXT!''

-- 


This person claims I have `threatened' Nate Sammons, Colorado
Cypherpunks Founder and Leader. I have done no such thing. Please do
not send me this vomit.

I am only posting this in case the person is serious, whoever starts an
investigation has something to go on. Death threats are illegal in the
U.S.Mail, and there is probably a pretty good case to be made they are
illegal in email as well. I'm not aware of any legal precedents. Maybe 
someone could post on the subject.

Hello everyone. I am a bit unclear as to what cypherpunks are really
promoting as far as privacy vs. pseudospoofing. The lack of official
comments by head cypherpunks make this difficult to sort out. Clearly,
you are in favor of some forms of pseudospoofing. Here is a list of all
the various forms I can think of. Please indicate which ones you are in
favor of. These are just some tentative names I'm coming up off the top
of my head for terminology.

pseudonymity: a name that is not traceable to a particular human being.

1) straight pseudonymity: the audience is aware of the fact that the
name is not traceable. (e.g. anon.penet.fi aliases, some book pseudonyms.)

2) semipseudonymity: the audience is not aware of whether or not the
name can be traced, and makes no assumption.

3) quasipseudonymity: the audience tends to assume from context that
the name is traceable, but it is not. I think email addresses fall in
this category, but (unfortunately IMHO) that is increasingly becoming the exception.

4) pseudoanonymity: the audience is deliberately deceived into thinking
the name is traceable when it is not. (e.g. a tentacle saying `I am a
real person.' or someone else vouching for them.)


Now, I have no objections to 1-2. And one can indeed have privacy with
them. But it seems to me that all the cypherpunks are promoting 3-4 in
the name of `privacy'. But it seems to me that (3) is misleading, and
(4) means active lies. These are not privacy. These are the tools that
criminals use to evade punishment for their crimes.

Also, one *must* make the distinction between *active* and *passive*
pseudonymity. If I read a book, I am not conversing with the author. I
am not asking him any questions about his identity. This strikes me as
harmless in most cases even if the reader is tricked into thinking the
name is `traceable'. But the interactive pseudonyms, those possible
with the internet, are extremely dangerous, because someone can
actively lie to me when I ask `who are you?'. And it really discourages
me that all you cypherpunks (e.g. J. Gilmore) think it is all the same
thing, Privacy.

So, which do you favor? (Please do not continue to obfuscate the issue
by pretending that they are all identical.)

Cypherpunks, I don't think you all understand the whole purpose of
names in the first place. They were invented so that we could function
as a society. The ability to `trace' a name to a human being is a very
basic aspect of social interaction and ettiquete. Every day that you
corrupt that trust you are not only breaking down governments, but
honest interactions. 

I am beginning to think that not only do the leaders have secrets from
the  followers, they have secrets from each other. Imagine one leader
asking the other through a tentacle, `what do you think of so-and-so'? yee, gad.

Where is your trust, cypherpunks? Why are you so paranoid? In my
experience, the people I have met that are the least trusting of others
are also the most paranoid. But they are also the most secretive
themselves. When you keep secrets from other people, you begin to think
the whole world is keeping secrets from you. Is all of history a big
lie to massage the egos of some people? The Bible is probably entirely
fictional too, right?

Don't you people know you are playing with fire? Active pseudoanonymity
is used to start riots and wars. I plant people around the mob or in a
country who agitate for the destruction of everyone. And real people
get caught up in the passions. Perhaps you think you can control this.
You are mistaken. He who lives by a mob, dies by a mob.

What is the consensus on that delightful little Nazi story about
pseudospoofing for espionage purposes? A glorious example of the
delights of pseudoanonymity? Something to strive for? This is the story
that I was going to send you all when your leaders told me what they
knew about pseudospoofing, that I was talking about for a long time.
But S.Boxx sent it before I had the chance. 

BTW I have misplaced the comments from the leaders that said they
didn't pseudospoof, could someone email them to me?
It appears I have made quite a pest of myself on this mailing list, and
that everyone hates me, and curses me as Satan, particularly at the
delight and encouragement of your leaders. In fact, a long time ago,
before it became clear I was such an unstable jerk and paranoid lunatic
out to get people who betray me, in fact around the time of the PGP
subpoenas, in which I had continually sent out some of my most
masterful and brilliant postings, when I still had a respectable
reputation, despite that P.Metzger was continually attacking and
dogging me in the most vicious way a human being (at least, I think he
is human, but on the Internet no one knows if you are a dog) can attack
another in cyberspace, that man who once thought that the name
`cypherpunk' just sounded too darn extremist and flamed me over my
insistence that it was colorful and dramatic, precisely the kind of
term that would inspire a Wired or a NYT reporter just enough to write
a story about a fraudulent sham, anyway, about this time E.Hughes told
me that I should learn some quality in my postings or he might employ
some method that would prevent me from sending them. I wondered, dear
sir, was this censorship? Actually, I was quite a bit more pissed off
than that, and said so in my mail, because I had tried to maintain a
positive communication with E.Hughes for many months, but no matter
what I ever wrote he had the most frigid, arrogant, authoritarian and
autocratic, dictatorial and tyrannical, `silent iron fist' opinion I
had ever seen in tens of thousands of messages I have sent to hundreds
of people over my ~4 years of Internet experience, small I grant you
but I have been typing the whole time! Anyway, Mr. Hughes said,  `If I
prevented you from posting, this would not be censorship.' I said, `if
this is an open forum, it would be censorship.' He didn't seem to reply
to that. I think the answer is that this is the Eric Hughes mailing
list, and that anyone who posts a lot and really refines what they
write, or has a large vocabulary, or writes mini-newsletters with
multiple topics the way the most respectable organizations do, like EFF
and CPSR, and flames the leaders when they do something stupid like
promote child pornography or abandon PGP, who ignores flames by people
who are obviously obnoxious idiots who yell at people for their better
accomplishments, who doesn't write in simple phrases that are more
chiseled than flowing, and doesn't post about totally arcane references
to Fermat's Little Theorem and Most Obscure Abelian Mathematics, copied
directly from references with no understanding to impress the hordes of
sycophantic followers, or name drops people who work at PKP (only
conspiracy theorists think they have anything to do with the NSA,
because they are really truly liberating), or takes the time to do
research behind his postings, this person is clearly guilty of the
obnoxious crime of not having sufficiently kissed enough ass to be
allowed to continue to post. In fact, I have consistently failed to
kiss the ass of all three leaders, who all strike me as corrupt and
consistently refuse to go to any length to suggest otherwise, and for
this I deserve the all the vicious retribution that you can unload on
me. In fact, there is a great opportunity to do so right now in the
newsgroups under the `Cryptoanarchist Conspiracy Alert' thread, I
encourage you to do so, instead of mail bombing me, which doesn't
really serve any purpose whatsoever except to demonstrate your sheer
idiocy. You might flame me for writing exceedingly long sentences and
paragraphs and letter, geez, you'd think you were trying to insult our
intelligence with big words and concepts we can't understand, all that
take so damn long to read and understand compared to watching
television,e.g. MTV music videos or Beavis and Butthead, who are far
more entertaining and uplifting and inspiring than my pathetic excuse for a life.

I really am disappointed, I thought I might be able to elicit some kind
of statement from your leaders on their personal knowledge of
pseudospoofing or pseudoanonymity here, especially in the face of
public pressure from honest members, saying `is what he is saying
really true? why are you refusing to answer him? have you really done
all that he claims?' I was really looking forward to posting that big
story fantastic story about pseudospoofing in WWII I offered to,
kissing and making up! I am not a vindictive person at heart, in fact,
writing letters like these drive me to vomit, but your leaders have
given me no choice. Its too bad that the belligerence and obstinance of
a few continues to spoil it for everone else. Honest cypherpunks, I'm
sorry that I can't tell you a neat story about pseudospoofing, but you
will just have to ask your leaders why they have deprived it from you.

Anyway, clearly I do not deserve to post here any longer! Its not
getting any of us anywhere. Mr. Hughes sent me mail recently suggesting
that I `can't take a joke', that I have no sense of humor. Perhaps it
is true! He should know! I will have to go somewhere else, for example
the newsgroups, and really post some of my best material I have ever
crafted, all that relates to my tenure and demise on the cypherpunks
list, especially that which relates to its corruptions and lies. Yet I
have failed to receive any mail (at least, that I know of at the
moment) from any of your leaders asking me to refrain from posting to
the cypherpunks list. In fact, I have waited for quite awhile for any
mail of this sort. I continue to write  unrequited! Please, let us all
achieve resolution. I ask that one of the leaders, for the benefit of
everyone here, send me any of the following messages. If you do so, I
will promise to stop posting under my True Name. Of course, I can't
guarantee anything about any other `penetration', particularly because
cypherpunks are the promoters of this kind of subversive infiltration,
and for me to be asked to refrain from it would be the epitome, the
height of corrupt hypocrisy. But, on the other hand, perhaps your
leaders reached that point a long time ago.

Anyway, I promise to do all this if I receive the following message:

Here is another interesting death threat. You might have noticed that
the previous one I posted had the header line from anon.penet.fi,
`x-anonymously-to: an12070'. It would appear on the surface that I
posted something that came from anon.penet.fi, was sent to
ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu, and used the an12070 alias, thereby
in posting it compromising my pseudonym. There are some interesting
possibilities at this point.

* The message was exactly as it appears, proving I am indeed an12070.

* I changed the header line so that, where before it was addressed to
an[x] where [x] is my anon.penet.fi alias, it became `x-anonymously-to: an12070'

I guess the question is: am I stupid? Would I deliberately do this to
further the L.Detweiler == S.Boxx speculation or make such a
spectacular blunder? Do you trust me not to change headers of mail I
post? Do I care if people think I am an12070 or that if my identity is
compromised? Am I in a mischievous mood? Did I make up the entire
message to gain sympathy? Would I do something that puerile?

I suppose you will have to ask an55805@anon.penet.fi. But what if *I*
am an55805, and I sent myself that death threat? That would be very
amusing, wouldn't it? an55805 might even claim that he sent me *both*
letters, and that both are real.

It seems to me that the only person that can resolve this is
determining who an55805@anon.penet.fi is. But if it is not me, this
person is guilty of sending one of the most grisly and overt death
threats I have ever received. I doubt it would be illegal but it could
get the person in hot water.

an55805, why don't you post here and settle this once and for all? Who
are you? Did you send me that mail? Can you prove you are not me while
at the same time hiding your identity?

To add some more interesting fuel to the fire, I will post another
message. This one was addressed as `x-anonymously-to:
ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu'. This message, of course, has
nothing to do with whether I am posting through an12070. You are free
to make your own decision as to what is real, and what is not. Too bad
that in cyberspace, no one knows if you are a liar.

BTW, I want to reiterate that I have never threatened N.Sammons, and if
he claims that I have, please post the mail. I admit I was extremely
upset at him and yelled at him for throwing me off the Colorado
Cypherpunks list without telling me and claiming that everyone on the
list asked him to without any evidence, and telling others that he did
tell me, but I am over it. Even though you haven't apologized, I forgive you Nate.

Mr. Leichter raises some extremely pivotal issues in CUD #5.90 related
to the `anarchy' of the Internet. B.Sterling is the author of one of
the most brilliantly colorful characterizations and metaphors of the
Internet as `anarchic', comparing its evolution and development to that
of the English language:


Unfortunately, though, having attended a lecture by Mr. Sterling and
having read `The Hacker Crackdown', I think he has a tendency to
overdramatize and glorify quasi-criminal behavior and rebellious,
subversive, revolutionary aspects of social structures, including those
of the Internet. In my view, to the contrary the Internet is largely
held together with the glue of social cohesion and human civility, and
ingredients that are destructive to that order are likewise toxic to
Cyberspace, and that, conversely, virtually all of the excruciating
poison in the bloodstream today can be traced to violations and
perversions of that trust. (Unfortunately, the English language is
itself subject to unpleasant, corrupt, or toxic uses such as for
profanity, disinformation, and lies, which are prevented or at least
minimized through rejections by honest people.) I agree with Mr.
Leichter in the belief (to paraphrase Twain) that `reports of the
anarchy on the Internet are greatly exaggerated'.


I would like to go further than this and suggest that the Internet has
been over-promoted as `anarchic' by certain subversive, quasi-criminal
segments that have found a tenacious hold there, namely extremist
libertarians and `Cryptoanarchists'. The Cryptoanarchist cause is
closely associated with the Cypherpunk founders E.Hughes and T.C.May
(characterized particularly by the latter's infamous signature), who in
my view appear to promote not merely `privacy for the masses' and `the
cryptographic revolution', but at least condone or tolerate the use of
collections of imaginary identities to manipulate and deceive others,
and even to evade legitimate government actions such as criminal
prosecutions. My most strident requests for their position, personal
knowledge, and potential involvement in this practice have gone
unanswered, evaded, and repressed over many weeks, but I have many
statements from followers that might be regarded as `cult fanatics'
about the Liberating Effects of `pseudoanonymity', which they exalt as
True Anonymity.

In my opinion, in this regard of the ease of creating fake identities,
the `anarchic' vulnerability of the Internet reaches its peak in
undesirable and socially poisonous consequences, which people are
bloodily battling daily on many diverse mailing lists and Usenet
groups. In my experience, the Internet inhabitants I have found who
most fanatically worship the Internet `anarchy' seem to be closely
associated with criminally subversive aims of pornography distribution,
tax evasion, black marketeering, and overthrow of governments, goals
which are all masked in much of the eloquent Cryptoanarchist dogma and
rhetoric. While some of us have glimpsed various hideous corners of
Cyberspatial Hell, those who subscribe to the Liberating Religion of
Anarchy are in their Paradise on the Internet As We Know It. I call
their Utopia a Ticking Time Bomb and a Recipe for an Apocalypse.

I have come to these (admittedly melodramatic) conclusions after ~10
months and ~3500 messages of generally unpleasant and at times
excruciatingly troubling and painful reading and participation on the
Cypherpunks list and many personal communications with the Cypherpunk
leaders including E.Hughes, T.C.May, and J.Gilmore. In fact, in my
opinion the `Psychopunk Manifesto' parody in CUD #5.89, which longtime
cypherpunk list subscriber P.Ferguson describes in 5.90 as having `made
its rounds in the cyberspatial world', actually in many ways comes
closer to delineating the actual cypherpunk agenda than the one
authored by founder E.Hughes on soda.berkeley.edu:
/pub/cypherpunks/rants/A_Cypherpunk's_Manifesto.  The satire is
actually a reformulated version of the original Manifesto, and the
former's amazing meme-virus penetration of the  into the cyberspatial
psyche that P.Ferguson alludes to is indicative of its resonance over the
 latter.

I gave the Cypherpunks the most extraordinary benefit of the doubt for
months, far beyond that of a reasonable cyberspatial inhabitant. But
now I must warn everyone who can hear me that if they assign the
`cypherpunks' as an organization the same credibility as a group like
EFF or CPSR they are dangerously, perhaps disastrously, misguided. They
appear to me to the contrary to be the cultivators of a flourishing
conspiracy and essentially the first Cyberspatial guerilla and
terrorist group! The Psychopunk satirization of the Cryptoanarchists is
representative of this Internet Anarchy Gone Awry.

More information on the CryptoAnarchist & Cypherpunk agenda can be
found in RISKS 15.25, 15.27, and 15.28x (FTP crvax.sri.com, directory
RISKS:). I also have an essay `Joy of Pseudospoofing', regarding the
dangerous consequences and poisonous effects of the manipulations of
fake cyberspatial identities such as on the Internet by
Cryptoanarchists, available to anyone who requests it from me by email
at <ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu>.

* * *

I think that many people have mistaken the word `anarchic,' implying no
overseeing authority or order (which the Internet is less) with the
word `decentralized' (which the Internet is more). Again, the
Internet has many regulatory and self-governing systems and orders.
For example, connecting sites are required to implement a certain
minimum set of software standards and prevent or even root out
corruptions in their local sites and software. We have centralized
databases that require the registration of domains for fees. A complex
network of agreements and policies governs interconnectivity and
communication, and a complicated interplay of elements affects basic
content such as `commercial vs. academic.' Lack of some of these
regulations and protocols would be disastrous.

I advocate that we build new formal mechanisms to enforce this order!
We have for too long pretended that a central element of the Internet
is not integral to it, namely that of the `degree of restraint over
network participants' exerted through `social pressure'. Let us codify
and formalize these `norms concerning network use and interactions' and
develop systems that enforce them! I believe such systems can be
developed that do not stray from the sacred Internet tradition of
decentralization of control and freedom from censorship. Why should we
continue to subject ourselves to the torture of `few effective
mechanisms for enforcing these norms broken on an all-too-regular basis'?

One of my most enduring Cyberspatial hallucinations is that of a
Ratings server. A Ratings server would be a massive distributed network
for the propagation of information similar to Usenet, and could
conceivably be built upon it. But the Ratings server is not
Information, as Usenet is, it is Information about Information. Anyone
can post an arbitrary message to the Ratings server that refers to
Information somewhere else in Cyberspace. It is in a sense a Rating of
that Information. The Information could be *anything* -- a mailing
list, a person, a particular Usenet posting, an FTP site. But postings
on the Ratings server can be perused by anyone, and anyone can
contribute Ratings to the server or indicate their own opinion on the
existing Ratings. Different mechanisms exist such that some Ratings are
`local' and some are updated globally.

The fantastic possibilities of this system are evident upon some
reflection and consideration. We could establish arbitrary new groups
that have *formal* requirements that are matched by Ratings servers.
For example, we could require that new sites that enter the Internet be
`trusted' by an existing site. We could require that membership in
certain groups requires a certain amount of collateral peer approval,
with automatic suspension or expulsion as the consequences for
violating it! We could have *meaningful* polls on arbitrary issues. We
could have news servers that automatically sort and archive articles
according to their passing certain Ratings thresholds. We could
restrict the influence of troublemakers! These are all examples of
strengthening and formalizing the informal social orders that are, in
my opinion, today just barely holding the Internet together. With a
Ratings system, I think the civility of the Internet would increase to
a fantastic degree. In short, we could have our *own* cyberspatial government!

Note that there is no centralized authority or unfair influence in this
system, unless people corrupt their servers. When everyone who has
joined a group *individually* decides to screen their postings of
messages that fail to meet a certain `quality' or posters who have a
certain `reputation', that is not Orwellian Censorship but the
beautiful Internet freedom and right of Bozo Filtering. When everyone
who joins a group *agrees* to a charter that may bar troublemakers
based on Ratings, no one can claim they are being unfairly oppressed.

Other extremely interesting implementation issues in the use of the
Ratings servers can be addressed in detail. For example, the use of
cryptographic protocols to ensure the integrity of voting or privacy of
certain entries will certainly prove invaluable and even critical to
their development. The optimal protocols for the localization or
distribution of votes will surely be subject to extremely fascinating
and fruitful research. In my view the concept of a Ratings server is
wide open territory and holds some immensely promising potential in
finally, valiantly slaying the dreaded, ugly, vicious Signal to Noise
Monsters harassing, terrorizing, and torturing us everywhere on the
Internet, to be replaced with Shining Castles.

I urge anyone interested in developing `civilized systems for
cyberspace' to subscribe to a new group I have helped start with
J.Helgingius (owner of the popular and revolutionary anon.penet.fi
anonymous server) called the Cypherwonks, dedicated to openness,
honesty, and cooperation on the Internet, and building sophisticated
new systems to promote social harmony in Future Cyberspace. We are
particularly fascinated with the possibilities of `Electronic
Democracy'. (Send a message to `MajorDomo@lists.eunet.fi' with the body
the commands `info' or `subscribe cypherwonks'.)

I fervently hope that the glorifications and manipulations of Internet
Anarchy by mouth-frothing libertarian extremists, Cryptoanarchists,
and sympathizers can be adequately controlled and minimized in the
future, and some harmonious systems and effective countermeasures
along the lines of the Rating server can be established by visionaries
and tinkerers, but in any case, for the sake of humanity's integrity,
sanity, and well-being, I pray that Future Cyberspace is far less
Anarchic than the Current Internet.
That's interesting. Perhaps you would like to enumerate these attempts. Here
are a few I can think of off the top of my head.

I asked J.Gilmore to send me his phone number to ask him about pseudospoofing
by Cypherpunk leaders and he told me that he only gave out his phone number
to his friends. I ask other cypherpunks for phone numbers and they call
it an `invasion of their privacy'. I asked Szabo about his claims in 
RISKS and he exploded that I was `digitally stalking him.' I got a message
from a Geof Dale (roommate of a college friend) who said generally he 
could assert that every cypherpunk I had ever wondered about being a 
pseudonym was a `true name' but refuses to give me his phone number to so I
can ask specific questions. Nick Szabo has also resisted simple requests of 
mine to verify that `Nick Szabo' is not a pseudonym. 

I also asked you, a long time ago Mr. May, to state a simple sentence to me in 
the form `I have never posted under the name J.Dinkelacker'. You refused
to do so. You did say `The assertion that I am J. Dinkelacker is too bizarre
to believe.' Ha, ha, and that time I asked you what sites you have ever posted
from, and your personal knowledge of multiple sites, you emailed my postmaster
and said that I was `harassing' you. Oh, and that contained another reference
to my `violent threats'. You seem to be quite sensitive to quotations like 
`death is the ultimate form of censorship.' Hee, hee.

The truth is that every attempt I have made to verify certain identities
has failed and led only to more grisly conclusions, such that Cypherpunks have
gone to the length of registering NIC domains and buying out-of-state phone 
numbers. Do not tell me this is impossible! A businessman friend of mine 
has a local phone number in NY that forwards to Denver! It seems to me
cypherpunks could use this very readily! (My kingdom goes to anyone who 
can provide me with the ability to trace the ultimate destination of 
phone calls in this way, and help uncover the amazing extent of the 
Cryptoanarchist conspiracy! volunteers desperately needed!)

As for what the paranoid ranter and conspiracy theorist an12070 thinks, 
who gives a damn? I'm always amazed at top cypherpunks, supposedly interested
in anonymity, attempting to equate me with this email address.

The cypherpunks have made an art, science, and religion of deceiving others
on the Internet and in the media. I do not consider the leaders respectable.
If they were,  they would have long ago answered my honest questions in
a straightforward manner.

And T.C.May is definitely the classic cryptoanarchist! Nice of you to
keep holding onto your infamous signature (now widely discredited) 
promoting tax evasion, black marketeering, and the overthrow of 
governments.

Yes, I am quite insane.

No thanks to you.

Owner of many tentacles. Please list all the sites you have ever posted
from, Mr. May. Ooops, that would be an Orwellian Invasion of your privacy.
A McCarthyist Inquisition. Hee, hee. You cryptoanarchists are so silly. I
am having great fun using your techniques of cyberspatial warfare and
against yourselves. I will not relent until top leadership issues unequivocal
statements on your involvement and knowledge of pseudospoofing. Lies like
that by E.Hughes in RISKS, `I have never posted under any other name than
E.Hughes' obviously do not count, although they may fool some people.

I do thank you, Mr. May, for your posting directly on this topic after my
attempts to date have failed. Perhaps you would like to invite your cohorts
on the cypherpunks list including E.Hughes and J.Gilmore to start a 
cyberspatial attack campaign on this thread the way you infiltrated RISKS
15.27 and 15.28x! I await the fireworks!

The most serious problems with the Cypherpunks may involve deception of
the media. I'm trying to figure this out as we speak. These lies are very
difficult to untangle! volunteers welcome!

oh, BTW Mr. May, when did you decide my first name was Larry and not Lance?
You called me Lance for 10 months or so on the cypherpunks list.

hee, hee. I would give so much to be at the next CA Clique Conspiracy
meeting in a week or two, to see how the leaders masterfully evade all
charges of misbehavior. 

-- 

ld231782@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU


Y'know, after all this hullaballo I still have no idea what Szabo does
for a living. Maybe he would like to post information about where he
works. Just general information that can be verified, nothing that would
invade his privacy. Ooops, I guess all cryptoanarchists believe that any
inquiry into identity (even those who claim to have one) is an `invasion
of their privacy'. Well, we can't get very far in that case. I will just
have to stick `szabo@netcom.com' into my `untrusted pseudonym' file.
hee, hee. Sort of a like a McCarthyist Witchhunt Inquisition list. Those
darn Cryptoanarchists.

My experience with Szabo started only after I read neat mail by Szabo 
stating how he had mastered the art of surreptitious posting from multiple 
sites. Mr. Szabo, could you please elaborate on your techniques? I had to 
guess at what you were accomplishing in RISKS 15.28x (or 15.27, hard to 
remember) because you are certainly not voluntarily going to reveal this 
information, eh? that's the name of the game with pseudospoofing. Also, 
you blew up when I followed up on your claim in 15.27 that many cypherpunks 
had attempted to help me verify their identities. `Which ones?' I asked. 
`What have they done for me?' You got really upset, remember, and threatened 
to stop posting from the name szabo@netcom.com entirely! I thought this 
highly suspicious, but perhaps you can explain it all.

Some of Mr.Szabo's comments and those by another tentacle I have discovered
suggest they are actually running sophisticate software to maintain their
arsenals of tentacles. This is my Holy Grail, to get information on that!
I suspect it was written by E.Hughes. He hasn't said a word on it. Oh, many,
many things for me to wonder about. Please enlighten me. I am just another
scientist in search of the truth, by iteratively refining his sense of what 
is not.

Sooner or later I will have to post an analysis of cryptoanarchist 
disinformation as posted by either Szabo or May (some of the very best
purveyors, IMHO).

-- 

Cypherpunks, you just don't get it. Why am I continuing to attack you
and your leaders despite your vicious, cowardly attacks on me and my
friends? Because, as long as you stand for *lies*, you do not have a
right to exist. And to the extent that you promote *lies* you are
corrupting the Internet and poisoning cyberspace.

J.Gilmore says, `a pseudonym is not illegal unless used for deceptive
purposes.' But you cypherpunks, that's the *only* purpose you are using
them for! If I asked a tentacle, `are you a pseudonym', and it said
`yes', do you think I would have gone to all this trouble to write tens
of thousands of words attacking people and a movement I used to
respect? If I asked your leaders, `have you ever communicated with me
under a pseudonym' and they gave me straight answers, do you think I
would still be around? YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO LIE TO ANYONE.

Cypherpunks, how many of you have gotten messages, `hey, what do you
think about T.C.May or E.Hughes and this pseudospoofing thing? Are you
going to do anything about it?' For all of you who don't give a damn
about your leaders pseudospoofing, why don't you care that your own
leaders could be molesting you with their tentacles in this way? Using
them in a manipulative way to gauge your loyalty to the movement and
manipulate your trust? On the list and in your email? WHY DON'T YOU
GIVE A DAMN? All I can conclude is that everyone here is in favor of
deception, treachery, betrayal, and perversions, *particularly* if
their leaders are responsible. Where the hell do you think I got all
the stuff for `Joy of Pseudospoofing'? You think I made it all up?

Your leaders molested me in precisely this way, but both the tentacles
and your leaders stonewalled, evaded, and counterattacked. They think
it is FUNNY how they have personally driven me to the BRINK OF
INSANITY. And they *continue* to escalate instead of making simple
statements about their beliefs in pseudospoofing, which would satisfy
me and anyone else who has doubts.

You want the truth? despite their bland statements your leaders *know*
that pseudospoofing is PERVERTED and that is the only reason they
refrain from saying anything about it, the only reason they continue to
attack me as a deranged lunatic. What am I, the police? I don't GIVE A
DAMN about all your perversions, as long as you keep them the hell out
of my mailbox. But you *don't*. Everytime I think there is another
person I can trust, it was nothing but another Leader Tentacle. Look,
if you LIE TO ME in mail, THAT PISSES ME OFF and I will ATTACK you for
it in an attempt to get to the TRUTH. and it should PISS OFF EVERYONE
ELSE HERE TOO but NOBODY GIVES A DAMN.

When I hear strange rumors about deceptions in the media, and your
eminent leaders fail to reassure me, why is no one else upset about
this?  Cypherpunks, don't you give a DAMN that articles by reputable
authors may contain DISTORTIONS AND LIES? Look, Markoff is a highly
respected writer. And if you lie or deceive a reporter, that is like a
personal insult. These people could get *fired* if their articles are
incorrect in a serious way. but you don't GIVE A DAMN. you think it is
FUNNY that you can TRICK REPUTABLE PEOPLE TO BELIEVE IN LIES and so you
can PROPAGATE THEM FURTHER.

Is there an honest cypherpunk in the entire world? None have contacted
me so far. There are a few people that are slinking away quietly with
their tail between their legs, but I think you all are just the same
scurrilous cowards that your leaders are.

Cypherpunks, please tell me what question I can ask of a psychopunk
tentacle such that it will not lie and say that it is a real person! If
you have any honesty or credibility, tell me that question!

You don't believe in honesty, though. You believe you have the right to
invade other's attention with your stealth identities. You rant loudly
that anyone who attempts to make sure you are real is insane and a
`digital stalker'. You believe you have the right to stick any mail
message in anyones mailbox, to post to any newsgroup you wish. You
believe that you have a right to trample on the rights of others. And
you know you are perverted, but attack me as Satan for telling you
that. You think you have the right to lie to anyone who asks, `who are you?'

Tell me that question. I will go away when someone tells me the question.
E.Hughes informs me L.Dyer is the cypherpunks Wired photographer. Could
someone help me get in contact with him?

E.Hughes says to me, `if you still can't take a joke, don't bother
replying.' I'm amused by E.Hughes, the most frigid cyberspatial
personality I have ever met, referencing the subject of humor. What is
the joke? Who is it on? L.Detweiler? G.Spafford? Wired? NYT? How many
sites? How many states does it span? How many countries? How many
registered DNS entries? What kind of software? How many fake
identities? What about the telephony manipulations? Every practical
joker I have ever met at least had the decency to *end* it.

ah, what a cruel joke. and the jokers delight in it. they will never
stop. to do so would be to admit that they are frauds.

Hello again, you darling cryptoanarchists! I just wanted to drop you a
line on the subject of my resume. At least one psychopunk has access to
my real paper resume and one tentacle has had long had access to an
ASCII version. An informer tells me that both have been circulating in
some circles for you all to smirk at. 

I consider this an atrocious breach of my privacy by more hypocrites.
My resume is directed at those who I intend, not those who wish to
discredit me. If you have knowledge of its circulation, please send me email.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled perversions.

How do you explain your statements I analyzed in RISKS 15.27, where you
posted to cypherpunks promoting your sophisticated pseudospoofing techniques? 
Multiple posting sites, countermeasures and contempt for `opponents' who 
attempt to determine whether your tentacles are who they claim to be.

Frankly, I think you are a baldfaced liar. Are you intellectually challenged
or am I going to have to go root up all the archives to prove it?

You cryptoanarchists are so arrogant. it will be your downfall.

``I have never communicated under any other name than E.Hughes.' (E.Hughes,
RISKS 15.28x)

``You can have your private conspiracy xor your public credibility. Soon,
you will have neither.''

-- 
--

hee, hee, once P.Metzger complained in his typical searing flame fashion
on the cpunk list that the word `cypherpunk' was just too darn subversive
sounding. Mr. Metzger is another classic cryptoanarchist. Hey Perry, could
you send me another mailbomb for tweaking your nose?

let the record show I am in no way agreeing with S.Sternlight <g>

people interested in civilizing cyberspace and repressing the cryptoanarchist
scum should send `subscribe cypherwonks' to majordomo@lists.eunet.fi.
Electronic Democracy is on it's way!

-- 


ha, ha, cryptoanarchists beware.


and the cryptoanarchists like you will call them `pigs' and resent them
for promoting law and order where you previously had your delightful
lawless anarchy.

I dunno, but I hope she cracks down on the cryptoanarchist terrorists like
you.

yes, the cryptoanarchists will be quite at home when it is possible and
rampant. The Cyberspatial Mafia. complete with corruption, bribery, and
hit men.

Warning: join the cypherpunks only if you are interested in cryptoanarchist
brainwashing from multiple fake identities, many of them from the leaders
themselves. `An interesting bunch of folks'. Hee, hee. more like 
cryptoanarchists and cyberspatial terrorists and guerillas, masters
of subterfuge and sabotage, gaining increasing respectability and influence
every day. You guys own a congressman yet?

Poor timmy and your cryptoanarchists, what are you going to do, given that
your favorite black uses are barred and illegal?

who will prevent people like you from building up arsenals of fake identities
to deceive others. 

poor timmy and his cryptoanarchists don't understand the world they live in.
they are outcasts and misfits who think that all forms of Government and
even Democracy are Orwellian oppressions. they will criticize any system
that attempts to put together secure email, that prevents forgery at the 
protocol level, as Orwellian.

You forgot tax evasion, black marketeering, drug trafficking, pornography,
distribution, espionage, overthrow of governments. When are you going to
update your .sig?


Delightful!

-- 

--

Sigh. No one has taken over for me, but I still have many requests from
people who loved the Guess Which Eminent Leader Said This game. I will
do this one in batches, and save the best for last. I include some
translations (they speak in CryptoAnarchish, and this will help refine
my translation skills). This is probably the last one, but one never
knows if I might get  some new material later.

* * *

Third Eminent Leader

The Third eminent leader is mostly uninvolved personally, but he is
still an accomplice to concealing the perversions of the other two leaders.


The point to make about this is that Chaum's pseudonyms are
*understood* to be pseudonyms by a bank. But this detracts from the
potency of the propaganda. And the Cryptoanarchist tentacles are very
different than magazine pseudonyms! But he will never understand
something so contrary to the Religion of Lies. (I was quite
disappointed to find he had been brainwashed.) Anyway, next one:

I was going to call this Eminent Leader to ask him about some of his
claims in his email messages and his personal knowledge and involvement
in the Cypherpunk pseudospoofing. I think he feels more comfortable
lying in email than on the phone.

* * *

Second Eminent Leader:

I can't remember if this was through the `jamie' tentacle or not. But
it is highly characteristic of this person, whose whole life is nothing
but a pretense. Every post of his was designed to cleverly conceal some
hidden agenda in respectable prose. A master of brainwashing! more on this later.


This is doublespeak for saying, `You had better not find out that I
have been molesting you with my tentacles all this time!'

* * *

First Eminent Leader:

The First Eminent Leader keeps a low profile on the list under his True
Name, but realize that his tentacles have always been the most active
of all! He is also a firm believer in the CryptoAnarchist ideology. He
is the main purveyor! Most other outlets are secondary. But he is very
careful only to speak through his tentacles, because he knows the
Cryptoanarchist agenda is inherently criminal. As for ideology, let's
just say he's more extremist than Perry Metzger.

``I am [x]. I have never posted or emailed under any name other than
[x]. At least, that's what I say. It's really a baldfaced lie. What I
am saying is that I have been so extremely clever (it is my nature to
outthink all the other pathetic brains out there!) that no one can
prove otherwise, particularly regarding the tentacles I have used to
molest my followers with. I can attest that I am different from other
people, including the ones that I invent.''

This was an interesting quote. You migh think that this person would be
scared of lying in RISKS or sending his tentacle-grams in for
submissions. Actually, he has been doing it for quite awhile!

The next one he sent me in private mail a long time ago. The scenario
was when I posted my message, `An Introspective Note' that led me to
all my brilliant realizations over the last few weeks, and the
demonization by every cypherpunk as Satan. So, this was long before I
had poisoned my reputation in front of the cypherpunks. (`The enmity of
a criminal is equivalent to the praise of a hero.')


And, one of my favorites. This demonstrates the leader's arrogance and
commitment to pseudospoofing quite nicely.

 ``That which can never be enforced should not be prohibited. That
which is illegal or perverted should be allowed. The claim that a
person should have only one pseudonym per forum indicates profound
misunderstanding. The claim that a leader should be prevented from
molesting his followers with tentacles indicates profound
enlightenment. If someone wants to have multiple pseudonyms, they will
be able to; that is one of the main goals of cypherpunks software. If a
 leader wants to molest even the people who trust him with dozens of
tentacles, he will do so, that is one of the main goals of my life of
lies. The situations you despise will occur. I, Medusa, will betray you
with my snakes. This is reality. This is my life. Change your own
psychology or change your own software. Become corrupt yourself or try
in vain to prevent something that cannot be stopped. You will not be
able to change the other person. I am God.''

Woops, I had sent off all my mail tonite before I read E.Hughes'
interesting messages. It was quite a surprise to see that he had sent
me anything. He's generally very quiet under the `E.Hughes' name.

Anyway, there have been a few questions by people on this list. `why
should we care about pseudospoofing?' the answer is that you should be
sure that your leaders aren't doing it. What if there were sensitive
projects that were volunteered by outsiders, and someone told them that
they were doing it all wrong? Well, if it were just some nobody, maybe
nobody would care. Frankly, I don't care as much if people `out there'
are involved in there little pseudoanonymity schemes, as long as they
stay away from me.

But if E.Hughes says, under a fake identity, `hey, you don't know what
you are doing, you are doing it all wrong' -- how does that promote
trust in your group? how will you ever get anything accomplished? you
have accomplished rather little when you look back on your months of
bickering on this list. I once tried to get the whistleblowing
newsgroup, and I think this is precisely what happened to me -- it
conflicted with what your leaders wanted to accomplish, so they flamed
me with their tentacles. But I am not prone to give in to intimidation
where I am committed, as everyone has noticed by now!

Furthermore, what if your leaders are doing this behind the scenes?
Promoting their pseudospoofing techniques among many without your
knowledge? Why would you possibly submit to that kind of an
environment? What if they have made an *art* *science* and *religion*
of deceiving each other and their followers with their tentacles? I
think this is something that no respectable person would have anything
to do with it. Either your leaders are not pseudospoofing, not
respectable, or my belief that pseudospoofing is poisonous is
incorrect. Take you pick! So far everyone believes either that
pseudospoofing is no big deal, or that I am crazy. Aren't you just a
*little* uneasy the way your leaders have responded to my charges?
Don't you care at all? Don't you want to know the truth? Don't you
recognize evasion when you see it? I am just a wimpy T.Cruise with
nothing but my mouth in front of me and my fake soldiers behind me,
saying (Few Good Men?) ``I want the TRUTH'', with your decorated leader
Jack Nicholson saying, ``YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH'' ... when are we
going to get to the ``YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT I ORDERED THE CODE RED!''

Mr. Hughes, Mr. May, Mr. Gilmore, answer me *one* question truthfully,
and I will go away.

How many different email addresses have you posted and emailed under?
(Include remailers and anon.penet.fi) What #?

For the record, I have posted under 2 -- anon.penet.fi, and
ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu.

Again, you don't have to sacrifice the privacy of any tentacles in
revealing this information. But an answer like `1' is obviously a lie,
and anyone who attacks me for attacking a lie I have no respect for. Do
not send me mail attempting to influence me.


Hello! I don't know why E.Hughes didn't cc: the cypherpunks with the
following message. He sent it to an internet mailing list devoted to
honest collaborations and Internet project development. 

False. The issue is about truth and the morality of leaders.

False. In an honest society, lies exist. You are asserting that they do not.

So tell, me, which is the case? Why do you continue to evade my
questions? Either be silent or tell the truth. Cease tormenting me and
your followers with your pathetic convolutions of the English language.

I prefer that when I ask you if you have done something that directly
affects your followers and myself, you tell the truth. I can gain no
benefit from people who evade my honest questions or a movement that is
led by a corrupt leader whose first instinct is to dig in and entrench
himself rather than be honest with the people who respect him.

Solipsism. Interesting term. In my opinion `solipsism' is the
philosophy for the height of arrogance. `I am the only one who exists'.
I have asked many, and they all have erected the same impregnable steel
walls that you have. They refuse to answer my questions with specific
denials. Why do you mislead the people who have made you their leader?

In a society where there is no honor or integrity, and instead there is
only corruption and lies, you are correct. No such question is
sufficient. I have found that out. I posted my message in the desperate
hope that a cypherpunk leader could tell me *one* question he would
answer honestly. `There is no such question, as I argue above'.

Good day, sir.


As for what the paranoid ranter and conspiracy theorist an12070 thinks, 
who gives a damn? I'm always amazed at top cypherpunks, supposedly interested
in anonymity, attempting to equate me with this email address.

 Message-Id: <9312041519.AA16672@anon.penet.fi>
 To: cypherpunks@toad.com
 From: an12070@anon.penet.fi (Pablo Escobar)
 puts the life of everyone in the group at deadly dangerous risk. He
 said something very bizarre to me, `so Lance, just HOW ARE YOU FEELING
 TODAY?' The strange tone was entirely uncharacteristic of him, and I


 I thought that the infamous L. Detweiler had stopped his posting, but it
 appears that he is back, and more neurotic than ever.
  but "S. Boxx" <an12070@anon.penet.fi> says:
 BTW, many thanks to L.Detweiler for his lone help in helping me break a
 corrupt conspiracy and massive cyberspatial hoax.

That's interesting. Perhaps you would like to enumerate these attempts.

If they were,  they would have long ago answered my honest questions in
a straightforward manner.

that by E.Hughes in RISKS, `I have never posted under any other name than
E.Hughes' obviously do not count, although they may fool some people.

I have noticed an interesting overlap between radical libertarians, crypto-
 anarchists, psychopunks, and people who promote sodomy.

 Whoever sboxx@lodestone.nsa.gov is, he sure ISN'T NSA!
 Everyone knows that NSA does not have an ip address and the one that
 it does use is so innocuous that any private knows it!
...
 Kasey
 a/k/a The Punisher

I have noticed an interesting overlap between radical libertarians,
  crypto-anarchists, psychopunks, and people who promote sodomy.

Just another repulsive variation on psychopunk depravity and
 perversions.  Honest people would be repulsed by it.

"Your hideous criminal clock, your insidious time 
 bomb, is tick-tick-ticking."           -- L. Detweiler

They have written customized software for pseudospoofing and style 
 analysis for cyberspatial warfare across the many lists.

I think all the cryptoanarchists, radical libertarians, and cypherpunks
who promote drug use seem to be in favor of a sort of social sadochism [sic]
and masochism.


You don't believe in honesty, though. You believe you have the right to
invade other's attention with your stealth identities. 

You believe you have the right to stick any mail message in anyones mailbox

to post to any newsgroup you wish. 

You believe that you have a right to trample on the rights of others. 

you know you are perverted, but attack me as Satan for telling you that.

You think you have the right to lie to anyone who asks, `who are you?'

Tell me that question. I will go away when someone tells me the question.

There would be no problem if I asked a tentacle, `are you a pseudonym'
and it answered `yes'. 

But the cypherpunks are setting up a network of
fake sites and identities and continue to claim, to the very end, `yes,
I am real' with their fake identities. 

Cypherpunks, please tell me what question I can ask of a psychopunk
tentacle such that it will not lie and say that it is a real person! If
you have any honesty or credibility, tell me that question!

oh, BTW Mr. May, when did you decide my first name was Larry and not Lance?
You called me Lance for 10 months or so on the cypherpunks list.

 Mr. Leichter raises some extremely pivotal issues in CUD #5.90 related
 to the `anarchy' of the Internet. B.Sterling is the author of one of
 the most brilliantly colorful characterizations and metaphors of the
 Internet as `anarchic', comparing its evolution and development to that
 of the English language:
 I think that many people have mistaken the word `anarchic,' implying no
 overseeing authority or order (which the Internet is less) with the
 word `decentralized' (which the Internet is more). Again, the
 Internet has many regulatory and self-governing systems and orders.
 For example, connecting sites are required to implement a certain
 minimum set of software standards and prevent or even root out
 corruptions in their local sites and software. We have centralized
 databases that require the registration of domains for fees. A complex
 network of agreements and policies governs interconnectivity and
 communication, and a complicated interplay of elements affects basic
 content such as `commercial vs. academic.' Lack of some of these
 regulations and protocols would be disastrous.
 I advocate that we build new formal mechanisms to enforce this order!
 We have for too long pretended that a central element of the Internet
 is not integral to it, namely that of the `degree of restraint over
 network participants' exerted through `social pressure'. Let us codify
 and formalize these `norms concerning network use and interactions' and
 develop systems that enforce them! I believe such systems can be
 developed that do not stray from the sacred Internet tradition of
 decentralization of control and freedom from censorship. Why should we
 continue to subject ourselves to the torture of `few effective
 mechanisms for enforcing these norms broken on an all-too-regular basis'?
 
 One of my most enduring Cyberspatial hallucinations is that of a
 Ratings server. A Ratings server would be a massive distributed network
 for the propagation of information similar to Usenet, and could
 conceivably be built upon it. But the Ratings server is not
 Information, as Usenet is, it is Information about Information. Anyone
 can post an arbitrary message to the Ratings server that refers to
 Information somewhere else in Cyberspace. It is in a sense a Rating of
 that Information. The Information could be *anything* -- a mailing
 list, a person, a particular Usenet posting, an FTP site. But postings
 on the Ratings server can be perused by anyone, and anyone can
 contribute Ratings to the server or indicate their own opinion on the
 existing Ratings. Different mechanisms exist such that some Ratings are
 `local' and some are updated globally.
Uh, I must have missed something, but a lot of the servers seem to be
down.  Is there a problem here?
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 20:00:58 +0200
Message-Id: <199312061800.AA26077@lassie.eunet.fi>
To: mech@eff.org
From: Majordomo@Lists.EUnet.fi
Subject: Welcome to cypherwonks
Reply-To: Majordomo@Lists.EUnet.fi
Sender: mech@eff.org

Welcome to the cypherwonks mailing list!

If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, send the
following command in email to "Majordomo@Lists.EUnet.fi":

    unsubscribe cypherwonks Stanton McCandlish <mech@eff.org>

Here's the general information for the list you've subscribed to, in
case you don't already have it:


This is the Cypherwonks mailing list

Below is The Cypherwonk Charter, by L. Detweiler, Cypherwonk Janitor

The cypherwonks are a splinter group from the cypherpunks also
interested in promoting and implementing cryptographic technology.
However, we have unique ideas on how to successfully implement these
radical new capabilities to ensure privacy without encouraging criminal
behaviors like forgery and `online predation'. We are also interested
in a far more ambitious goal of `technological progress' that
transcends a mere obsession with privacy and anonymity. The cypherwonks
believe that many aspects of a identification and government are
necessary and crucial for any social stability (particularly related to
judicial and law enforcement systems), and are quite alarmed at talk
about a `cryptoanarchy' resulting from the mere implementation of
software protocols -- although we realize that radical new forms of
government may appear with these new technologies, embodied in one term
`Electronic Democracy'.

We believe that while sometimes the `majority' can become a `tyranny',
in general the idea of voting as a civilized way of resolving proposals
and `one person, one vote' are sacred, and we are interested in
implementing systems that promote interaction and collaboration among
motivated and enthusiastic members, whether within the cypherwonk
organization or within their nations (cypherwonks, of course, try to
think free of local prejudices, and globally).

Cypherwonks understand that *trust* and *honesty* are inherent in all
human endeavors, *particularly* communication. We recognize that people
trust others not to reveal our private email unless given permission,
we trust others not to use information from our mail or about their
identities to adverse aims, we trust that systems delivering mail will
not be corrupted by criminals, or if they get caught there will be
serious consequences, and many other explicit and implicit variations.
We know that there are many ingenious ways of minimizing the amount of
trust required in unknown components such as with the use of
cryptography or pseudonyms, and we seek passionately to invent and use
them, but at the root level, email is an exchange between human beings
who trust each other. Therefore, we hold a sense of ethics and morality
in strong reverence, and even though we're not always precisely sure
what they entail, we know that they exist and we strive for the right
ideal. We abhor the idea that `it's not wrong if you can get away with
it' or other variations of moral relativism.

Cypherwonks are also extremely interested in promoting and implementing
`digital cash', but believe that while invariably the state's taxes
tend to become burdensome, few civilized, technological societies are
free of them, and certainly we do not advocate tax evasion, `black
marketeering', or any other subversive or illegal activities through
cryptographic techniques, and even beyond this we seek design protocols
that discourage these subversive aims in general, because of their
toxic, fragmentary effect on social unity.

Cypherwonks recognize that our mailing list is extremely critical in
coordinating our movement and our fellow members. It is our central
nervous system. While the list is informal, we demand a professional
atmosphere, and will privately object to people who are publicly rude
or belligerent. But we are also extremely careful about what we say to
each other in private, because people can be extremely influenced by
what they receive in mail. We would be aghast and horrified to find
that somebody viciously criticized someone in private mail based on
public postings, for example. We place high value on being courteous to
each other and minimizing disagreement where possible, forging
consensus, and the art of diplomacy in surmounting political barriers.
We trust each other on the list and in personal email. We wish to have
an open, uplifting, inspiring, honest, representative, polite,
respectful, egalitarian dialogue. We will never use the mailing list
for personal or selfish reasons -- we strive to serve our fellow
cypherwonks through our postings. We are what we claim to be. We abhor
secrecy, `security through obscurity', and conspirational cliques.

Cypherwonks are extremely interested in promoting some forms of
anonymity. However, we do not necessarily believe that others are
required to read anonymous postings. To the contrary, we believe that
the individual should have the tools and freedom to filter his or her
own mail based on real identities. In particular, we condemn the
practice of `pseudospoofing,' the dangerous deception where a person
builds up a pseudonym and misrepresents it as being that of a real
person's identity. We police each other on the list to prevent it, and
require a promise that our members refrain from it. While our trust can
be betrayed, only those that are honest are true cypherwonks, and
anyone who betrays our trust we consider a dishonist hypocrite, or worse, a tra
  *itor.

Cypherwonks are extremely interested in building tangible systems.
Engineers who love to discuss the nitty-gritty details of some scheme
are at home on the cypherwonks list. We like to impress each other with
our knowledge but at the same time state it in relevant and humble
terms. We are not trying to win popularity contests with our postings.
We are trying to accomplish ambitious endeavors. We are especially
ecstatic to make connections with other cypherwonks interested in the
same projects we are, and cooperating to build useful tools. We like to
give status reports of our intermittent real-world meetings and
progress to other cypherwonks. We do this to inspire and encourage
others, not to assuage our egos or flaunt our power. We recognize that
this is the true spirit of the Internet embodies in the volunteerism
that build the impressive RFC and FAQ repositories. In fact, we are
very fond of writing RFCs and FAQs. We keep track of all the things we
have accomplished, and are very proud of this group resume, and delight
in adding new items.

The Cypherwonks are more inclusive than exclusive. We try to
accommodate the interests of others. We consider it a high crime to
`flame newbies'. In fact, we go out of our way to encourage greet new
members with smiles in email. We especially like to have reporters on
the list, and treat them like royalty. But we also make sure that no
one is hogging the spotlight. We try to match up reporters with
different people on the list. Some people are naturally `leaders',
particularly the list moderator J. Helsingius, but in general we don't
lionize or deify anyone. The greatest cypherwonk is always the last
person who posted the most interesting, relevant, and useful article.

While we thrive on the Internet, and greatly admire the system, we also
realize the structure of the Internet is evolving and growing. We tend
to distrust `authorities' regulating the Internet, but at the same time
we recognize that the Internet exists and is popular because of a
strong community feeling with a `netiquette' that places a strong taboo
on things like censorship, cracking, and pseudospoofing and a strong
interest in individual effort and innovation.  In short, we are
interested in `civilizing cyberspace' with the powerful new
technological tools like cryptography and digital cash that are
available but unimplemented. We believe that the current Internet is a
bit raw and untamed in places, like a frontier, and just a `glimmer in
the eye' of future cyberspace, and we seek to smooth out the rough
spots, build elaborate and hospitable castles to live in, and invite
all of humanity here to join us for a party. 

* * *

List topics (not exhaustive)

-Projects (secure phones, etc.)
-Cryptographic techniques (RSA etc.)
-Anonymity
-International news events in privacy/anonymity
-Clipper
-real world meetings (others and our own)
-etc.

* * *

Cypherwonks of Note
(this list will be updated)

J. Helsingius
Operator, anon.penet.fi, first widespread reliable anonymous remailer
in popular use on the Internet

L. Detweiler
Privacy & Anonymity FAQ, Anonymity FAQ, Whistleblowing FAQ



Hello world, I am not proud of everything I have posted `out there' lately,
but I am even less proud of the ugly depths and grotesque deformities
I have seen in certain black corners of the Internet lately, and the
apalling complacency with which you all view it. The skeletons
have not only fallen out the the closet, they have danced around us and
punched us all in the face. My own letters on the subject are an attempt to
shock you from your silent complacency and `accessorizing'. 

What happens when trust breaks down? What happens when people respond 
to their own posts? When they misattribute writing? When they don't care 
who is behind email addresses, or deceive others about them? When they 
post multiple messages from different addresses? 

Imagine that every one of my posts came from a different address.
What is to prevent me? My honesty? My integrity? What if I am a 
cyberanarchist? Would I be horrified or delighted at these embezzlements 
of trust? By the squirming and writhing of my victims underneath my 
crushing onslaught?

* * * 

I was reading a book about ancient torture techniques. (Actually, it was
about something else, but some paragraphs on the subject crept in from
obvious relevance.) 

The Roman soldiers had invented some of the most grisly torture and execution
techniques the world has ever seen, perhaps the most humiliating and heinous
punishments known to man. One that I was reading about was called 
`Circle of Eight'. A blindfolded prisoner stands as Roman soldiers 
(enthusiastic volunteers?) circle him and take turns punching him in the 
face. They take the blindfold off, and ask him, who hit you? And if the 
prisoner fails to name the person, the game continues, they dance in their 
delight, circling at a faster, more dizzying rate, and pummel harder.

What is the point of all this? I don't have a major point, except to 
suggest that this is one of the most evil abominations of humanity I can
imagine. And that it is shockingly identical to the mentality that a 
cyberanarchist has in hammering others with his fake email identity 
arsenals. 

Medusa is delighted to punch the blindfolded victim in the face with
her dizzying circle of tentacles. Guess who it is! Ooops, you're wrong,
sorry. PUNCH. What? No, N.Szabo is a real person. PUNCH. Pseudospoofing
is immoral? nah. PUNCH. N.Szabo is my roommate. PUNCH. Lies are 
liberating. PUNCH. cypherpunks have never pseudospoofed. PUNCH. 
especially the leaders. PUNCH. and everything in the media is true.
PUNCH. especially what we say. PUNCH. and our leaders are the 
greatest of all. PUNCH.

See the blood dripping on the ground, see the hideous disfigurement of
the victim's face.

* * *

I am posting this many messages to drive home the point that
the Cyberanarchists are not really noble at all. They are like Roman 
Soldiers who will hit you when they see that you are blindfolded. Otherwise,
they hide in the shadows like all the rest of the cowardly slime at the 
putrid, dank recesses of humanity. And unless someone takes out the 
trash, we're going to have to get used to the smell. But where will we 
go to eat, then?

go ahead, tentacles, water down my words with more trash. dilute and warp 
my message beyond all recognition. that's probably all we read is, anyway.
all of history is just a big lie set out by people who aren't interested
in the truth, but in fooling us to assuage their egos. the Bible, of course,
is the worst of all.

* * *

I read one author who suggested that as part of Christ's torture before
literally bearing his cross, he had been subjected to the Circle of Eight.

Cyberanarchists, who are you punching? What was that saying of Christ's, 
as you do unto the lowest of men, you do unto me?

I think the question you have to ask yourselves is, if a victim is 
blindfolded, does God hear his screams? 

What if the soldiers are athiests?

When does the Circle of Eight stop, anyway? When the victim is 
unconscious? When he is dead? 

``NEXT!''

-- 
  SCENE: Satellite of Love.  Tom Servo is polishing a glass globe that
looks just like his own head.

Crow:  Whatya doing?
Tom:   I'm just.... polishing up a fishbowl.  I thought it'd look good
	  here by the hexscreen (he moves over to the hexscreen and
	  places the bowl, opening up, just under the hexscreen).
	  What do you think?
Crow:  I think that's silly.  First of all, there's no place to put a
	  fishbowl there.  Besides which, we don't have any fish here
	  to put in a bowl.

  (Mike enters from stage right)

Mike:  Are you two arguing again?

  (Light flashes to indicate an incoming call from the Mads)

Mike:  Never mind; let's see what they want this time.  (taps button)

  SCENE: Deep 13.  Dr. Forrester is holding a cheap-looking mask resembling
his own face.

Dr. F:  Hello, Matt.
Mike:   That's 'Mike'.
Dr. F:  Whatever.  Anyway, it's time for your Invention Exchange, unless
	  you need more time to set it up and want me to go first--
Mike:   Well, actually no--
Dr. F:  OK, I'll go first.  Of course, a mad scientist in my position has
	  his share of enemies, and some of them are a bit too tough to
	  be beaten off directly.  The next best thing is misdirection:
	  getting them to vent their frustrations on something more...
	  what's the word... 'expendable'.  (Turns toward stage left)
	  Oh, Frank!

  (Frank enters from stage left)

Dr. F:  I need you to model this (hands Frank the mask)

  (Frank puts on Dr. F mask)

Dr. F:  As you can see, the perfect decoy to cover my escape if things
	  ever get too hot to handle.  And now, your turn.

  (Mike holds a telephone with several types of bells, horns, and other
noisemakers attached to it.)

Mike:   You're finished, then?
Dr. F:  That's what I just _said_.
Frank:  How long do I have to wear this?
Dr. F:  (To Frank) Until I tell you to stop!  (To Mike) Well??
Mike:   We all know about Caller ID, but it has one big problem: you don't
	  see the caller's ID until you get close enough to read that little
	  display window.  My invention is a Caller ID Ringer that lets
	  you know whether the call is worth picking up without even having
	  to get out of the bathtub.

  (Cash register bell rings)

Mike:   See, that tells you it's one of those calls from somebody asking
	  you for money.

  (Bugle call of 'Reveille' sounds)

Mike:   That tells you it's an Army recruiter calling.

  (Foghorn sounds)

Mike:   That means it's your boss on the line.

  (Poofter pops out of phone, with sound)

Mike:   That means a call on the party line.

Dr. F:  Yes, yes, I'm sure you've got a million of them, but that's all
	  the time we have for the Invention Exchange.  Now, for your
	  experiment, I have a special treat. (grins evilly)  You remember
	  L. Detweiler, alias R. Boxx, alias about a dozen other names
	  I can't be bothered to keep track of?

Crow:   I have a bad feeling about this....

Dr. F:  Well, we have a rare treat: a post from him under his very own
	  name (as far as we know).  Boy, are you in for some deep
	  hurting this time!

  (Movie alarm goes off)

  6....5....4....3....2....1....G



(Mike and Crow enter theater)

Mike:  Where's Tom Servo?

Crow:  Repeat??  Isn't once bad enough?


  (Tom Servo enters theater)

Crow:  What took you so long?
Tom:   I had to finish with the... fishbowl.

 > Hello world, I am not proud of everything I have posted `out there' lately,

Crow:  And you have so much to be not proud about!

 >but I am even less proud of the ugly depths and grotesque deformities

Tom:   Of my terrible secret past.

 >I have seen in certain black corners of the Internet lately

Crow:  Hey!  That's "African-American corners of the Internet"!

 >                                                             and the
 >apalling complacency with which you all view it. The skeletons
 >have not only fallen out the the closet,

Mike:  They had a falling out, and outed each other, and are now out of
	  the closet.

 >                                         they have danced around us and
 >punched us all in the face.

Crow:  (Muhammad Ali voice) Dance like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

 >                            My own letters on the subject are an attempt to
 >shock you from your silent complacency and `accessorizing'.

Tom:   With out lovely line of spring accessories for 1994.

 > What happens when trust breaks down?

Crow:  (German accent) It decayz into a migzture of Uranium 235 and
	   Plutonium 238.  Very hazzardousz zubsztanzes.

 >                                      What happens when people respond
 >to their own posts?

Tom:  They're schizo?
Mike:  Maybe they're just absent-minded.

 >                     When they misattribute writing?

Crow: OK, so they're absent-minded AND schizo.

>                                                      When they don't care
>who is behind email addresses,

Tom:   Schizo, absent-minded, and now apathetic.
Mike:  This is getting hard to keep track of.

>                               or deceive others about them?

Crow:  Schizo, absent-minded, apathetic, and dishonest....
Mike:  Is somebody writing this down?
Crow:  Hey, you're the only one here with fully functional arms!
Mike:  (takes notepad and pencil from a pocket)

>                                                             When they
>post multiple messages from different addresses?

Crow: As we come full circle back to schizo.

> Imagine that every one of my posts came from a different address.

Tom:   Not hard in this guy's case.

>What is to prevent me? My honesty? My integrity?

All:   NAAAAAH!

>                                                  What if I am a
>cyberanarchist?

Mike:  (jotting something on a notepad) How do you spell that?
Tom & Crow:  (turn to look at Mike)
Mike:  (tosses notebook and pencil into the air)

>                Would I be horrified or delighted at these embezzlements
>of trust?

Tom:   He doesn't know how he'd react to his own actions?
Crow:  Jeez, enough already with the "schizo"?

>          By the squirming and writhing of my victims underneath my
>crushing onslaught?

Mike:  Hey!  I didn't think the Mads were sending us that kind of movies!

* * *

> I was reading a book about ancient torture techniques.

Tom:   Like these posts.

>                                                        (Actually, it was
>about something else, but some paragraphs on the subject crept in from
>obvious relevance.)

Mike:  Obvious to _you_, maybe.

> The Roman soldiers had invented some of the most grisly torture and execution
>techniques the world has ever seen, perhaps the most humiliating and heinous
>punishments known to man.

Crow:  Throw Sandy Frank to the Romans!
Tom:   Lippert, too!

>                          One that I was reading about was called
>`Circle of Eight'.

Crow:  (pirate voice) Arrrgh, mateys!  I have a sack of doubloons and Circles
	  of Eight.
Mike:  I think that's PIECES of Eight.
Crow:  Whatever.

>                   A blindfolded prisoner stands as Roman soldiers
>(enthusiastic volunteers?) circle him and take turns punching him in the
>face.

Mike:  I think his verb tenses are about two thousand years off.

>      They take the blindfold off, and ask him, who hit you?

Tom:   The guy with the brass knuckles?

>                                                             And if the
>prisoner fails to name the person, the game continues, they dance in their
>delight, circling at a faster, more dizzying rate, and pummel harder.

Tom:   On the other hand, if he _does_ correctly name the person, he wins
	 a new 94 B.C. chariot and a year's supply of Rice-a-Roni.

>What is the point of all this?

Mike:  I was hoping you'd tell _us_!

>                               I don't have a major point,

Crow:  Imagine my surprise.

>                                                           except to
>suggest that this is one of the most evil abominations of humanity I can
>imagine. And that it is shockingly identical to the mentality that a
>cyberanarchist has in hammering others with his fake email identity
>arsenals.

Tom:   You can send an arsenal through email?
Crow:  What will they think of next?

>Medusa is delighted to punch the blindfolded victim in the face with
>her dizzying circle of tentacles.

Tom:   Punched with a circle of tentacles??

>                                  Guess who it is!

Crow:  You already _said_ it was Medusa!  The tentacles are a dead giveaway.

>                                                   Ooops, you're wrong,
>sorry.

Crow:  _I'm_ wrong??  I'm just going by what you just said!

>       PUNCH. What? No, N.Szabo is a real person. PUNCH. Pseudospoofing
>is immoral? nah. PUNCH. N.Szabo is my roommate. PUNCH. Lies are
>liberating. PUNCH. cypherpunks have never pseudospoofed. PUNCH.
>especially the leaders. PUNCH. and everything in the media is true.
>PUNCH. especially what we say. PUNCH. and our leaders are the
>greatest of all. PUNCH.

Tom:   Stop it!  The pain!  The pain!

>See the blood dripping on the ground, see the hideous disfigurement of
>the victim's face.

Tom:   (head explodes)
(Mike and Crow exit hastily, Mike carrying Tom)


  SCENE: Satellite of Love.  Mike places Tom on a table and begins
looking around frantically.

Mike:  Crow!  Quick!  Help me find a spare head for Tom Servo!  We don't
	  have much time!
Crow:  (exits stage left)

  (A second Tom Servo enters from stage right)

Mike:  Tom Servo!  Quick!  Help me find a spare head for Tom Servo!

  (Mike stops and does a double-take)

Mike:  What?!?  But you're there (points to Tom Servo on table) with your
	  head blown apart from illogic overload or something....
Tom:   (chuckles)  Oh, that!  That's just one of the alter egos I use
	  when I need a break from the Mads' experiments.

  (Light flashes to indicate an incoming call from the Mads)

Tom:   Quick!  Get that out of here!  I don't want them to find out....

  (Mike pushes the remains of the other Tom Servo out of sight under the
table.)

  SCENE: Deep 13.  Frank is still wearing the Dr. Forrester mask.  Dr. F
is wearing an equally cheesy-looking Frank mask.

Frank: Well?

Mike:  Frank?  Are you still wearing that silly mask?

  (Dr. F rips off his own mask, then Frank's.  Frank clutches his nose,
which was pinched by Dr. F's grab).

Dr. F: Oh, stop whining and push the button!

  (Frank keeps both hands on his nose and fumbles for the button with his
elbows, hitting it after several tries).
I thought this was all documented in the NYT. Does anyone have the
article? Anyway, Mr.Diffie says (see below) that nothing sinister
happened at the patent office regarding the RSA patent. I would like to
hear of any other patents that were suppressed by the NSA hiding behind
the patent office. I mean, this professor was definitely not making up
a story! She gave me the NYT reference but I think I accidentally threw
out the paper I wrote it on. Does anyone have the reference? I think it
happened in '78.
Hello, I asked W.Diffie (cryptographer celebrity!) about the RSA patent
a long time ago, and I thought everyone here would be interested in
what he had to say on the subject. I was curious about a story I heard
about the NSA suppressing some patent at first. I went to a lecture by
an ethics professor once in Nebraska and she talked about how some
academic researcher had got an application for a patent back rejected,
with no explanation, and that after an extremely long battle, the poor
scientist discovered the NSA was to blame. 

The lecturer wasn't specific about the case but used it as an example
in talking about the relation of government to science and the research
establishment and the possibility of censorship. The scientist had
discovered some sensitive cryptographic secret, apparently, and the NSA
was spooked by it (hee, hee, very punny!). I asked P.Zimmermann about
this and he seemed to think the story was about the RSA patent.

I thought this was all documented in the NYT. Does anyone have the
article? Anyway, Mr.Diffie says (see below) that nothing sinister
happened at the patent office regarding the RSA patent. I would like to
hear of any other patents that were suppressed by the NSA hiding behind
the patent office. I mean, this professor was definitely not making up
a story! She gave me the NYT reference but I think I accidentally threw
out the paper I wrote it on. Does anyone have the reference? I think it
happened in '78.

Also, If W.Diffie is listening (he told me on the phone he subscribes
to the list) could you get in touch with me? I haven't been able to get
any response to my email. Also, it seems you have more than one email
address at Sun, and I'm confused about which to use (my mail to one
given to me by J.Gilmore bounced).

Before the story gets around from other sources, here's what *really*
happened.  I guess that I should start by saying that I'm sorry.  I'm
sorry for the tremendous disturbance that I caused, I now see that I
was completely wrong.  Nick Szabo is a real person, and I was mistaken
to say otherwise.  I don't know how to go about cleaning up the mess
that I made, but I guess that I'll start by humbly asking all of you
to forgive me.

It began when I was at home one evening last week, watching TV.  The
voices were back again. They told me that the TENTACLES were going to
use his account to spread their LIES, and to RAPE the unsuspecting
net.virgins.  The more I thought about it, the more agitated I became.
Their SCREAMS filled my ears, and their TEARS came from my own eyes.
I couldn't sleep because I knew that their fates rested in my hands.
I had to do something.  The hell that awaited them was known to me
alone, and only I could save them.  The poor souls would SQUIRM in
AGONY and CRY OUT in pain, but the GROTESQUE cypherpunks would only
LAUGH.  Every time that I closed my eyes, I'd see the inferno.  The
monsters believed, I knew, that no joy was greater than UTTERLY
DESTROYING an unsuspecting user, SODOMIZING their innocent victims
just as they do each other.  I thought about posting another message,
but decided that this time I had to take my stand.  The SATANIC CABAL
must be BROKEN, as totally and completely as the Tower of Babel.  I
flew to Washington, D.C., determined to prove once and for all that
szabo@netcom.com is nothing but a deceiving TENTACLE, bent on PILLAGE
and PLUNDER.  Once that was done, the fate of the MEDUSA was sealed.

Thanks to one of his net *friends*, I had Szabo's phone number.
Locating his address was not difficult.  I knocked at the door and
asked for Szabo.  The fellow who answered the door asked my name and,
when I gave it, he told me to wait there.  A few seconds later I heard
a voice from upstairs yelling ``Call 911!  Call 911!''.  His roommate
jumped me and we wrestled until, finally, I freed myself and was able
to calm him down enough to talk.  Szabo came downstairs and said that
he'd called the police, and I'd better hightail it out of there or be
prepared to spend some time in jail.

Thinking that he was an imposter paid by t.c.may and e.hughes to act
as Szabo should anyone check, I agreed to talk with the CHARLATAN.  He
would meet his fate soon enough, and he would PAY DEARLY for his
complicity.  I convinced him that I wasn't armed, and he agreed to
talk.  He insisted that he *was* Szabo and tried many ways of proving
it.  He produced a drivers license and a passport, both issued to
Szabo and with pictures of this same man.  They seemed valid.  I was
confused.  He then dialed into netcom as szabo and read some mail.  It
was then that I noticed the sounds, soft and just at the edge of my
hearing.  It was a light and breathy sound.  It was... LAUGHTER.  The
VOICES WERE LAUGHING AT ME.  It was then that the clouds parted and
the gleaming ray of sunlight came down to illuminate my vision.  All
of the time that I had spent jousting quixotically with the
cypherpunks had been wasted, as they weren't the enemy.  They weren't
the ones who were sending the voices to disrupt my sleep.  It wasn't
them at all.  The voices were my true enemy, and I set out with
renewed vigor to seek out and destroy the voices.

Um, anyway, I guess that he really is szabo@netcom.com.  Sorry.

Now what I need to know is how do I go about rebuilding the reputation
that I've spent so long destroying?  So many people have learned to
ignore posts from my account that I fear I'll not get another hearing.

Gee, maybe on the internet they CAN tell if you're a dog...



As for the `Szabo being a tentacle thread' in the newsgroups, pmetzger
just posted stating that he had indeed posted the name of 
the town Szabo lives in, as well as the names of his roommates.  He refrained
 
from posting that information again.  I seem to vaguely recall seeing the 
original post, but can't find it in the buffers here -- everything before 
December 21st or so has expired. 
 
the thing that ROYALLY PISSES ME OFF is that NOONE WHO HEARD 
PMETZGER CLAIM THIS has POSTED TO SAY THAT THEY HEARD HIM SAY THAT. 
reminds me of the infamous rape and murder of that NY woman, with 
dozens of witnesses hearing her screams, just going about their 
business. who will be raped next? and who will be silent? everyone who 
is watching my thread, and being silent about what they know, is a 
hypocrite and a dangerous accomplice to lies. 
 
I guess that's a bit overstated.  I suspect people in most major metropolitan
areas don't want to get involved partially because they fear retribution, and

partially because, with that many people packed together, you tend to care 
less about your neighbors than you would in a small town, where you know the 
people in your building or street.  I suspect people on the net don't bother 
because "it's just bits" -- they read the Net like they watch TV, without any
connection to the characters or dramas unfolding before them.  In large part,
 
what is said here doesn't really matter.  People get curious, but it's not 
worth getting into an uproar. 
 
if YOU GIVE A DAMN, POST! 
 
Ah, there's the rub.  Deep down, I really don't care about this particular 
issue.  To my knowledge, Nick Szabo, whether real or not, has never said 
anything that has made me even care whether or not he has real.  I've never 
found anything he's said particularly interesting.  He's a net.person.  Shoul

he turn out to be a "tentacle," that's fine by me -- he won't be the first 
I've encountered.  If he turns out to be T.C.May in disguise, all that means 
is that there's one less person with T.C.May's ideas in the world than people
thought. 
 
I think that uncaring attitude, which I regard as fairly dominant among peopl
e 
who've used cyberspace (and especially Usenet) a good amount of time, is the 
very reason that May's ideas about widespread crypto bringing down government
s 
will never come to pass.  People have, and I believe will continue to have, a
 
distrust about putting much faith into computers, and thus cyberspace will 
always have limitations.  I believe people put a great deal of stock in the 
feel of a crisp paper dollar bill, as well as a smile and a handshake. :-) 
 
Perhaps to add more fuel to the fire, a Nicholas Szabo does indeed live in 
Cupertino, according to a 1990-1991 White Pages from the area.  There is no 
G.Dale listed, however.  (I was hoping to correlate the two numbers)  I 
suspect that I need a more recent phone book to make a better test. 
Hello, I recently saw Mr. May's delightful `Who is L.Detweiler' post. I
am going to address this posting in utmost seriousness. It contains
very many inaccuracies and distortions that I simply cannot let stand.

Mr. May and all other cypherpunks have the most self-centered,
egotistical view of the universe of anyone. Mr. May, his associates,
and his sycophantic followers distort the truth so frequently that they
eventually begin to believe their own lies. The pattern of taking
credit for other's hard earned accomplishments, starting with
Zimmermann's PGP and even in the case of my `insanity' (the Big Mac
term for anything I write, no matter how lucid), persists forever.

First, reports of my insanity are greatly exaggerated. They seemed to
have originated with P.Metzger. At first I was just writing `rants' and
these became labelled as `insane' as a simple progression in terms that
paralleled the Cypherpunk desperation at my tenacity.

Mr. May starts out with an amusing account of my tenure on the
Cypherpunks list, apparently believing that was the beginning of my
existence. For cypherpunks, who live in their complex inbred
environment in cyberspace, it is.

I think it is clear to anyone who has posted on the list for some time
that it is filled with two classes of people: the people who attend CA
meetings and grovel at the feet of the High Leaders, Gilmore, Hughes,
and May. And there are the independent thinkers who occasionally agree
but also call the leaders Stupid when they post messages that imply
stellar stupidity or hypocrisy (e.g., `Abandon PGP!' `Change the
Cypherpunk Name to Something Less Subversive'!). And we have the
Wannabes from around the world, people like D.Barnes (TX) and Nate
Sammons (CO) who look up to their Gods in reverent awe and hope to be
Big Macs themselves one day.

In short, the list has been intensely political, laden and smacked with
complex secret and hidden loyalties, from the beginning. Anyone who
flames a leader for stupidity or hypocrisy, based on nothing other than
their actual posts, is considered a `frustrated wannabe'. Everyone here
fits into some particular caste. (The Cypherpunks do exist in a sort of
mysterious balance with some outsiders, but usually there is only
enmity in the case of irreverence on the outsider's part and approval
if there is glorification and idolatry.)

Mr. May makes long reference to my postings on the Cypherpunks list,
characterizing them all as a sort of bag of ad hominem insults and
rants. I stand by everything I have ever posted to the Cypherpunks
list, contrary to T.C.May, who is deathly terrified that anyone outside
his little inbred fiefdom should stumble on his rants about how all Law
Enforcement and Governments are inherently Evil, how Pornography is
Liberating, etc. These are just the rants that he says *publicly*.
Behind the scenes all three leaders, Gilmore, May, and Hughes, promote
much more subversive ideology and religion to their cult of fanatic
followers. `Lies are Liberating' etc. The media has been infected with
their distortions of their agenda of hiding criminal activities such as
tax evasion, black marketeering, money laundering, and the overthrow of
governments under the guise of `privacy for the masses' and `the
cryptographic revolution'.

I have forever attempted to start projects on the Cypherpunks list, but
found lukewarm interest and searing enmity from the CA Clique. One
project was the whistleblowing newsgroup, which was a success from the
beginning. I wrote the FAQ for it and despite that its activity has
declined, people still inquire about the FAQ. But the CA psychopunks
were opposed to this project, because they were not controlling it. And
they conspired in the most malicious ways to thwart its establishment.
One of their favorite tactics is to say, `so and so is working on it.
don't do anything.' If anyone else has gotten this line from any
cypherpunk, I urge you to ignore it as a lie.

I think it is clear that Electronic Democracy and the cypherpunk vision
of Cryptoanarchy are simply fundamentally incompatible. But it took a
long time for me to realize that it wasn't that it wasn't a great idea,
but that the CA psychopunks recognized their Antichrist when they heard
the words `Electronic Democracy' and flamed it into oblivion with all
their tentacles on the list.

>He apparently decided that I, for example, was using a
>variety of fake names, including Nick Szabo, Hal Finney, Geoff Dale
>(yes, the very same folks you all know from _this_ List!), 

yes, cypherpunk readers, and from *where* else do you know them? G.Dale
is real, but as for the others...?

we know that szabo@netcom.com was one of your favorite sites to
`pseudopool' from, or have many different cypherpunks post through from
`behind the scenes'. T.C.May was one such cypherpunk. This question of
who posts through the account is independent of who Szabo is as a human being.

The escalation started, really, after I had been betrayed by real
tentacles. Mr. May as usual is very careful to avoid any specific
references to them. And our information that T.C.May, E.Hughes, and
J.Gilmore are all involved in a pseudospoofing conspiracy comes from
insiders, not from speculation. This is why they are deathly terrified
of making any conclusive statements about their complicity.

I thank Mr. May for explaining the new terminology invented to
adequately summarize the cypherpunk conspiracy.

I don't recall those. I'd be delighted if you post even one message of
the thousands I have written and sent in email, instead of distorting
the truth about their contents.

I ask Mr. Hughes and Mr. May whether it is an invasion of privacy to
tell the world whether someone is on their list or not. I also ask them
why they seem to think that I am not receiving the cypherpunks list
even as I post to it.

I'm delighted at Mr. May's reference to the cypherwonk charter as
`fascist'. Everyone is free to read it themself. send `info
cypherwonks' in the message body to majordomo@lists.eunet.fi. I think
you will find that the charter actually simply insists on a code of
ethics and morality in cyberspace -- something cypherpunks and their
leaders, not surprisingly because of their aversion to honesty, brand `fascist'.

I would like to know why Mr. May continually insists, despite our
damning evidence to the contrary (which unfortunately we are unable to
present publicly at this time, to continue to delineate the extent of
the conspiracy), that he has never used a `tentacle', and
simultaneously claims that rules and regulations about true identities,
against `the evils of pseudospoofing', are `fascist'.

I have never said any such thing.  I have however posted some satirical
messages about `death to tentacles' or `death to cyberanarchists' that
could be misconstrued as real death threats by people with overactive
imaginations spurred by their fevered consciences. Mr. May's barrage of
references to events that have never happened and text that does not
exist frustrates me in the extreme-- most frustrating is that the
BrainDead, the Blind, and the Brainwashed do not challenge it. 

Mr. May, who says that he has no idea why anyone thinks he has
pseudospoofed with tentacles, says that S.Boxx `slipped' when he
`confused identities'. Why is this a `slip', Mr. May? What is your
advice on how to avoid such a `slip'?

the same list of circumstantial evidence could be built to associate
szabo@netcom.com with T.C.May. In fact, I challenge Mr. May to say the
following: I have never posted a message under the szabo@netcom.com
name. And if he succeeds in doing so, I ask why he has refused to claim
this publicly for months, despite ample opportunity and the urging of
many outsiders.

again, a `goof'. But it seems that only someone that believed that
keeping identities *separate*, and *deceiving* people of their
independence and uniqueness, would consider the S.Boxx prose `slips' or `goofs'.

The Colorado cypherpunks is not even a half dozen people, and when I
was kicked off `we' (at that time, `we' anyway) had had one meeting at
a coffee shop. It is nothing but Nate Sammons and a pathetically lame
list, and it was refreshing to be thrown off it, because it helped me
be free of these petty, egotistical people, CA wannabes, and discover
new enemies. There was no `expulsion', it was nothing but an
egotistical dictator, very much similar to E.Hughes, throwing me off
the list unilaterally and without telling me, secretly conspiring with
the rest to do so, and lying about the events that led to my
`expulsion'. As for my relationship with PRZ, the CA cypherpunks have no clue.

As for `shooting and killing', I have a few things to say. (1) People
who know me know that I am the most nonviolent person in the world. My
writing may be violent by my body is not. (2) I do not own a gun or any
other deadly weapon, contrary to virtually all the cypherpunks. (3) Mr.
May announced publicly in the newsgroups that `I have a Gun' and
indicated he would use it if I ever visited the CA area. If there is
any paranoia about `shooting and killing' it is entirely his. (4) All
the cypherpunks are nothing but stellar hypocrites when they complain
of `death threats' in writing. The believe that, apparently, all
messages are meaningless unless I type them. When I talk about their
conspiracy I am lying, but when I am ridiculing their fears, it is
`violent death threats' to be taken with the utmost seriousness,
unequivocal proof that soon I am going to go off the deep end and take
hostages or kill someone.

Mr. May, when he sees editorial cartoons in the newspaper, probably
likewise considers them `forgeries'. He is incapable of understanding
the distinction of truth and satire, having, like the rest of the CA
psychopunks, stoned himself for years on lies.

What Mr. May calls `forgeries' are actually carefully crafted insults
and satire directed at the people most responsible for the Cypherpunk
conspiracy, and masterpieces of art, as the enormous exploding S.Boxx
following attests. In giving no respect to the Cypherpunk identities by
ridiculing and misrepresenting their signatures, a karmic balance is
achieved with their own disrespect for the honesty of trust of others
in their routine, continual, persistent, unabated violations and
embezzlements accruing from their own poisonous pseudospoofing.

If anyone doubts my claims anywhere in this letter, please read Risks
15.25,15.27, and 15.28x, or ask Mr. May to provide the nonexistent
letters that he refers to.

Actually, I heard that S.Boxx is being held hostage or has been
assassinated by cypherpunks. Or it could be that he hasn't been
censored at all, but that I claimed that to show that Cypherpunks, such
as T.C.May (who has admitted to requesting S.Boxx be censored) were the
hypocrites who asked that he be.

So that's the saga of T.C.May and the cypherpunks, the biggest Net Perversion to be
born in cyberspace.
Hello darlings! I was playing with your remailers recently, yesterday
in particular, and was a bit disappointed in them for a variety of
reasons. I got a list of the current ones from K.Barrus some time ago
but even this supposedly up-to-date list had a lot that appeared not to
work. Out of ~20 on the list, ~8 sent back a ping message. One kept
sending me some strange error.

In another test, I sent out an informative posting to a whole bunch of
mailing lists recently through some of the remailers. The remailers
seem to be very fragile and can be overcome by a huge onslaught of
postings. It appears that every new message spawns a new process, and
the machines get overloaded and don't have memory left to do anything.
Kind of a serious flaw! One could mess them up doing this. Good thing
that no one has any malicious feelings toward the cypherpunks or their
remailers, or this might have already happened.

As a solution to the `spawning' problem, here is a possibility: I am
just guessing, but I bet the perl script is grabbing in the message
from the incoming socket at the beginning, and then closing the socket,
and then going about its business to send the message out. But during
this period, new messages can be sent to the now `clear' socket, hence
spawning a new process. A solution would be to keep the socket `busy'
for the duration of the execution of the perl code. Another solution is
to have the messages sent into a buffering script, and something else
continuously running in the background to go through the queue to send messages.

Finally, I was wondering if anyone else was doing Ping tests on the
remailers for run times and whether they post them. If there is
interest I would be willing to write a script to automate this process
and post the results say every week, so that people can keep abreast of
what remailers are active and responsive. If we want a strong
infrastructure for all our evil deeds, we have to make sure that it is resilient!

Thanks, and please don't flame me for trying *earnestly* to contribute!
We (operation Cyberanarchist Repression and Poison) thought you might
like an update of our current status and future plans. We have been
extremely busy! So much has happened lately! Remember when we said,

That was a reference to Operation Tick-Tick-Tick. We were really
delighted with the outcome of this attack, we made very significant
gains in our campaign, and there were some stellar fireworks. The
sequence of Usenet posts equating cyberanarchists with drug users and
Sodomites found great response. The Cyberanarchist glossary was
unchallenged! We nailed the szabo@netcom.com tentacle mercilessly, and
he is afraid to show his sickly green face any more.  The Pit Bull (His
Royal Eminence) showed up to make a fatal mistake in exposing the Szabo
tentacle, and we nailed him some too (his brilliant smear tactics give
us more ideas ourselves!). As usual, Emminent Eric has been rather
quiet. We did spoof him spectacularly with that Apology feint. `I never
wanted a brainwashed follower.' `Democracy stinks.' `I am the anti Christ.' Ha, ha.

Tantalizing Timmy showed up a bit `out there' to further whine, evade,
and threaten, and tell us that he doesn't know anything about drugs! He
says he has a gun, and isn't afraid to use it! Fantastic! `The rumors
about high level conspiracies and drug use are false' he says. Ooops,
have you talked to Ingenuous John? (hee, hee). You guys really have to
work on getting your stories straight. It's pretty pathetic. As for the
BS, we don't know who it is you saw at your last Cypherpunk party and
their California IDs. Must have been some cardboard cutouts! Oh, what
fun. This is all in addition to the shrapnel wounds on the public lists
(we have no comment on the private ones!).

We appreciate your feedback in all areas. What did you think of the
delightful poetry? How about the Nazi Espionage story? That brought
tears to our eyes when we thought how much your own Big Macs have
surpassed the Fuhrer in their own present glories and future ambitions.
Perhaps the people `out there' on Usenet will be similarly impressed ... ?

===

Nevertheless, the Big Macs don't seem to understand that we have long
since lost interest in the tentacle exorcisms, although we like to
continue to play to keep our practice. We have graduated to the Big
Leagues and they are still scratching their crotches in the minors.
Full fledged exposure! The Cypherpunk Credit union for money
laundering! the black markeeting! the tax evasion! The lies in the
media! The secret mailing lists! Thank you so much for finally coming
clean (or at least opening a few windows to diminish the stench) in
some key areas. Our next projects should help encourage you to continue
this wonderful Glasnost, where before we had the KGB.

Once again, we remind you that you can relent and surrender at any
time. Some of the things we are interested in at the moment:

1. Further information on the media deceptions in Wired and NYT. These
are very difficult to unravel.

2. A complete status report of the TX bank and CA credit union. Maybe
some more info on the `real' Chaum link.

3. A complete comment by the Big Macs on their knowledge and
involvement in pseudospoofing and all the `quasi-legal' activities.

4. A complete list of all the secret mailing lists. Your subscribers to
this list would probably be interested in this too, why not post it
publicly? After all, they don't know that all the *real* development is
being done under the table. Kind of ironic, too, how long people were
asking for a `list split', not knowing that it had already been done in
secret. Ah, a pity, but that is your modus operandi.

But, since in the true spirit of warfare we must be prepared for any
eventuality, including the continued persistence and tenacity of the
enemy. So you know, here are some of the operations we are planning
over the coming weeks and months, listed in scale of seriousness and potency. 

Operation SQUISH - a very sophisticated and comprehensive simultaneous
attack on many fronts that will involve a `grass roots' approach vs.
the last `top down' attack in the newsgroups. Medusa keeps asking for
our complete knowledge. This will lay it all out on the table for
everyone to examine -- a complete list of tentacles, Small Fries, Big
Macs, Poison Needles, Medusa Sisters, and Medusa. It will also be a bit
disorienting for you in the spirit of our favorite tactics of
`polymorphic paragraphs'. You really seem to get a buzz from that. If
you think that the last Usenet strike was bad, wait 'til you see what
happens with this one!

Operation Octopus - this is the multiple pseudonym and agent project.
We plan to have at least a dozen (hence the name) posting
simultaneously to many different lists and the newsgroups. But the
overhead on this is very significant, and it will take us awhile to
gear up and build the infrastructure to the point we can `engage'. You
have seen more of these agents lately `out there', but our coordinated
attack will take some more planning.

Hopefully, these operations will crack the nut. It is already wobbling,
splintering, chipping, and shaking. But this is a tough nut to crack.
The following operations are far more insidious and devastating. We
have been hinting about them in various places. They are our `secret
weapons' -- the will require some further developments, but will be
immensely effective in destabilizing your technology and `movement'.

Operation Duplicity - extremely top secret. Let's just say, you will be
seeing double, and triple, and quadruple, and ...

Operation Apocalypse - extremely top secret. Let's just say, Robert
Morris and Richard Depew would be proud ...

Of course, in the meantime your list will be subject to the same
drizzle of froth that has you so excited lately. And we'll probably
recycle some of our better artillery to strategic positions `out there'
on Usenet some more. We wish to thank T.C.May personally for all the
stellar ideas in Reputation Assault and Cyberspatial Sabotage. What's
good for the criminal is good for the police, so to speak!

Finally, just to let you know, we are going to take a momentary
breather here and scale back all the current operations somewhat to
reorganize and retrench before the next onslaught, so enjoy the
respite. Happy New Year!


p.s. you might want to see this below. This software and attack report
was part of our last strike, Operation Tick-Tick-Tick. The software for
the new operations is far more complex (you know how difficult it is
e.g. to track multiple identities well), partly the reason for the delay.

INTRODUCING

===

    #####       ####       ##  ##      ####       #####      ##  ##
   ###         ##  ##      ##  ##       ##       ###         ##  ## 
    ####       ##  ##      ##  ##       ##        ####       ######
      ###      ##  ##      ##  ##       ##          ###      ##  ##
   #####        ###\\       ####       ####      #####       ##  ##
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Introducing the SECRETLY QUIZZICAL UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT!

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * ENDLESS ENTERTAINMENT *

CONTENTS
========

- INTRODUCTION
- UPDATES
- DEADLINE
- THE CASH PRIZE
- MORE ABOUT `SQUISH' & `FACE'
- QUESTIONS


===

The recent WHITE HOT interest by multiple groups and individuals in the 

		 CYBERANARCHIST TENTACLE INFILTRATIONS

into the Internet have inspired an EXCITING NEW CONTEST and COMPETITION!

we, the Federation of Associations of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE), 
announce the 

	SUPREMELY QUACKY UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT! (SQUISH)


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * FAMOUS PARTICIPANTS *


UPDATES
===

  updates on the SQUISH contest will be posted regularly. Send in
  notice of the more spectacular point accumulations with proof for
  verifications immediately and the Halls of Fame and Shame.
  Unverified points are not valid toward the cash prize.


DEADLINE
===

  TIME IS RUNNING OUT! AVOID INQUIRING FURTHER OR WAITING FOR FURTHER
  INSTRUCTIONS. START IMMEDIATELY! MONTHS OF PARTICIPATION ARE
  REQUIRED TO ACCUMULATE COMPETITIVE STANDING. SOME PARTICIPANTS
  ALREADY HAVE A HEAD START.
  
  THE CASH PRIZE WILL BE AWARDED APRIL 1, 1994. FURTHER INCREMENTS
  WILL BE AWARDED AT YEARLY INTERVALS THEREAFTER.


MORE ABOUT `SQUISH' AND `FACE'
===

  The Federation of Associations of Cyberspace, Everywhere was founded
  in 1994 as a group that coordinates the activities among the many
  different online organizations. We have played a very low-profile
  role to date, and wanted to find some way of promoting our newfound
  alliance. We have groups combined from BBSes, local area networks,
  the Internet, and other global and local networks around the world
  (see below).

  We have built up some membership funds from the contributing
  organizations and private contributions to provide the prize money
  for SQUISH, and some private individuals have donated significant
  amounts. The contest was inspired by S.Boxx, who was the architect
  of point classifications and the current opponent lists. S.Boxx has
  also promised to provide any funds necessary for the successful
  completion of the contest. We hope that recent interest into snakes
  and tentacles by many on the Internet will make the contest
  spirited entertainment and a strong success.

  We encourage reporters and the media to use this announcement as our
  official press release. Feel free to redistribute or comment on
  this announcement in any forum.


QUESTIONS
===

  Address further questions to cypherpunks@toad.com, gnu@toad.com,
  tcmay@netcom.com, or hughes@ah.com. Some additional information is
  available in RISKS 15.25, 15.27, 15.28x: ftp CRVAX.SRI.COM, login
  anonymous, directory RISKS: (include the colon), file RISKS-i.j

===

    /////       ////       //  //      ////       /////      //  //
   ///         //  //      //  //       //       ///         //  // 
    ////       //  //      //  //       //        ////       //////
      ///      //  //      //  //       //          ///      //  //
   /////        ///\\       ////       ////      /////       //  //
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
       Introducing the STELLARLY QUOTABLE INTERNET SNAKE HUNT!

===

Brought to you as a coordinated effort between the individuals

  * S.BOXX
  * MEDUSA
  * INFOCALYPSE
  * THE EXECUTIONER
  * PABLO ESCOBAR
  * DEADBEAT

and the Federation of Associations of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE)

  * ILF (INFORMATION LIBERATION FRONT)
  * BLACKNET (INTERNET ESPIONAGE COORDINATION HEADQUARTERS)
  * BLOODNET (CYBERSPATIAL BLACK MARKETEERING AND LIQUIDATION SQUAD)
  * CRAM (CYBERSPATIAL REALITY ADVANCEMENT MOVEMENT)
  * CRaP (CYBERANARCHIST REPRESSION AND POISON)
  * CY{B,PH}ER{PU,WO}NKS

===

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS *
     * GRISLY DEATH TORTURE * JUDGEMENT DAY * APOCALYPSE NOW *



    #####       ####       ##  ##      ####       #####      ##  ##
   ###         ##  ##      ##  ##       ##       ###         ##  ## 
    ####       ##  ##      ##  ##       ##        ####       ######
      ###      ##  ##      ##  ##       ##          ###      ##  ##
   #####        ###\\       ####       ####      #####       ##  ##
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Introducing the SOPHOMORIC QUARTERLY UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT!

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * ENDLESS ENTERTAINMENT *

CONTENTS
========

- INTRODUCTION
- OBJECT OF SQUISH
- SQUISH DIRECTIONS
- UPDATES
- THE CASH PRIZE
- DEADLINE
- MORE ABOUT `SQUISH' & `FACE'
- QUESTIONS


===

The recent WHITE HOT interest by multiple groups and individuals in the 

		 CYBERANARCHIST TENTACLE INFILTRATIONS

into the Internet have inspired an EXCITING NEW CONTEST and COMPETITION!

we, the Federation of Associations of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE), 
announce the 

	SUPREMELY QUACKY UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT! (SQUISH)


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * FAMOUS PARTICIPANTS *

===
OBJECT OF SQUISH

  the OBJECT of SQUISH is to find TENTACLES and SNAKES.  A TENTACLE is
  an email address used by a real person for the purpose of
  concealing their identity from others. A SNAKE is a TENTACLE that
  is particularly wicked and evil and will lie and trick others into
  believing the TENTACLE is real. In words, the more consequential
  and malicious a TENTACLE, the more it is a SNAKE.

  Different points are awarded for playing. Anyone who can send mail
  can play! The simplest and cheapest points come from sending email
  to suspected  SNAKES and TENTACLES, and chalking up points
  depending on the responses. Larger points are awarded for `real
  world' interactions such as calling  suspected tentacles and snakes
  at their telephone numbers. 

  When a snake or tentacle gets upset in response to mail, it is said
  to be QUIVERING. It will go through CONTORTIONS to convince you to
  leave it alone and may begin to SQUIRM if you persist. When people
  are not writing through fake email addresses, they are said to be
  using their TRUE NAME. TRUE NAMES may go through quivering,
  contortions, and squirming too. Sometimes snakes or tentacles may
  threaten to stop using an email account entirely. 
  
  Some of the TRUE NAMES are BIG MACS and some are SMALL FRIES. Much
  larger points are awarded for exposing the BIG MACS, but some
  points are available for SMALL FRIES. BIG MACS are famous people on
  the Internet-- people that no one would expect have snakes and
  tentacles, or have media stories written about them. Massive points
  are awarded for BIG MAC exposures.

  Matches take place in Cyberspace on the PLAYFIELD, with different
  regions consisting of INFECTED OUTLETS, CRIME SCENES, and KILLING
  FIELDS. A KILLING FIELD is a place where a tentacle and a player
  compete or a Big Mac is assaulted. INFECTED OUTLETS are media
  outlets or journals that carry BIG MAC propaganda, disinformation,
  or lies. A CRIME SCENE is a place where provably illegal activity
  takes place, e.g. someone passes a bribe. 

  The grand point prizes go to anyone who can expose MEDUSA. MEDUSA is
  the leader of all SMALL FRIES and BIG MACS, a wicked, evil
  incarnation of SATAN on the Internet. She is the originator and
  chief proseletyzer of the art, science, and religion of lies.
  MEDUSA has dozens of SNAKES  all over the Internet, particularly in
  extremely sensitive areas such as Internet protocol development
  (e.g. mercantile or digital cash protocols), posting from public
  access sites and even `covers' and `front' sites, these are called
  POISON NEEDLES. Corrupt administrators are always either BIG MACS
  or SMALL FRIES. Some sites have administrators who are unaware or
  apathetic toward infiltrations, these are called PAWNS.
  
  MEDUSA is the orchestrator of a MASSIVE INTERNATIONAL CONSPIRACY to
  STRANGLE, SABOTAGE, and POISON THE INTERNET. Anyone who can drive
  MEDUSA and all the corrupt BIG MACS from Cyberspace and the real
  world forever is called THE SAVIOR and said to have DRIVEN THE
  PHARISEES FROM THE TEMPLE. However, the player must avoid being
  CRUCIFIED or the cash award will not be given.

  POINTS can be traded in for COLD CASH. The first person with more
  than  500 points gets A DOLLAR PER POINT (some restrictions apply,
  not valid in all areas, void where prohibited by law, taxes may
  vary).


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
     * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * MYSTERIES OF THE UNKNOWN *

===

SQUISH DIRECTIONS

1. Consult the list of SUSPECTED SMALL FRIES, BIG MACS, SNAKES,
  TENTACLES, MEDUSA & SISTERS, and POISON NEEDLES below. Send mail to
  any attempting to discover whether they are real or fake, or have
  knowledge of other BIG MACS or even MEDUSA. 

2. When you get CONTORTIONS or SQUIRMS, or mount COUNTERMEASURES,
  keep track of your all your points in a file. Ratings are listed
  under RATINGS below. List the persons and email addresses involved
  and quote the actual mail. Keep permanent and complete records of
  all mail.

3. The biggest points are awarded for the greatest deceptions. Some
  snakes in the lists below (the most deceitful ones) have actually
  installed out-of-state phone numbers, developed software for
  coordination, and have an international arsenal of infiltration
  points.

4. In particular go after the BIG MACS and MEDUSA, where the most
  fantastic points are awarded. Some BIG MACS know of MEDUSA; they
  are called MEDUSA'S SISTERS.

5. The categories listed below of SUSPECTED SNAKES, TENTACLES,
  ACCOMPLICES, BIG MACS, and  MEDUSA are not conclusive or
  definitive. In particular, some people in these lists may be
  INNOCENT BYSTANDERS, and their harassment should be minimized. But,
  be careful! the SNAKES, TENTACLES, ACCOMPLICES, BIG MACS, and
  MEDUSA will all claim to be INNOCENT BYSTANDERS.

(rules subject to change without notice. watch for further
announcements.)


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * SECRET CONSPIRACIES *


UPDATES
===

  updates on the SQUISH contest will be posted regularly. Send in
  notice of the more spectacular point accumulations with proof for
  verifications immediately and the Halls of Fame and Shame.
  Unverified points are not valid toward the cash prize.


THE CASH PRIZE
===

  A cash prize will be awarded to the first person to surpass 500
  points, one dollar per point. The person may continue playing to
  continue to gain cash. Further awards may be presented to close
  contenders. Some restrictions apply. Void where prohibited. Tax not
  included. In the case of deceased victims the award will be given
  to the nearest living relative, or the Federation of Associations
  of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE) if all relatives have met 
  mysterious fatal accidents as well. If the world economies have
  collapsed from cyberanarchist sabotage before the award is 
  granted, no further action is necessary (this constitutes the final
  sign of the Apocalypse).


DEADLINE
===

  TIME IS RUNNING OUT! AVOID INQUIRING FURTHER OR WAITING FOR FURTHER
  INSTRUCTIONS. START IMMEDIATELY! MONTHS OF PARTICIPATION ARE
  REQUIRED TO ACCUMULATE COMPETITIVE STANDING. SOME PARTICIPANTS
  ALREADY HAVE A HEAD START.
  
  THE CASH PRIZE WILL BE AWARDED APRIL 1, 1994. FURTHER INCREMENTS
  WILL BE AWARDED AT YEARLY INTERVALS THEREAFTER.


MORE ABOUT `SQUISH' AND `FACE'
===

  The Federation of Associations of Cyberspace, Everywhere was founded
  in 1994 as a group that coordinates the activities among the many
  different online organizations. We have played a very low-profile
  role to date, and wanted to find some way of promoting our newfound
  alliance. We have groups combined from BBSes, local area networks,
  the Internet, and other global and local networks around the world
  (see below).

  We have built up some membership funds from the contributing
  organizations and private contributions to provide the prize money
  for SQUISH, and some private individuals have donated significant
  amounts. The contest was inspired by S.Boxx, who was the architect
  of point classifications and the current opponent lists. S.Boxx has
  also promised to provide any funds necessary for the successful
  completion of the contest. We hope that recent interest into snakes
  and tentacles by many on the Internet will make the contest
  spirited entertainment and a strong success.

  We encourage reporters and the media to use this announcement as our
  official press release. Feel free to redistribute or comment on
  this announcement in any forum.


QUESTIONS
===

  Address further questions to cypherpunks@toad.com, gnu@toad.com,
  tcmay@netcom.com, or hughes@ah.com. Some additional information is
  available in RISKS 15.25, 15.27, 15.28x: ftp CRVAX.SRI.COM, login
  anonymous, directory RISKS: (include the colon), file RISKS-i.j

===

    /////       ////       //  //      ////       /////      //  //
   ///         //  //      //  //       //       ///         //  // 
    ////       //  //      //  //       //        ////       //////
      ///      //  //      //  //       //          ///      //  //
   /////        ///\\       ////       ////      /////       //  //
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Introducing the SUGGESTIVELY QUESTIONABLE UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT!

===

Brought to you as a coordinated effort between the individuals

  * S.BOXX
  * MEDUSA
  * INFOCALYPSE
  * THE EXECUTIONER
  * PABLO ESCOBAR
  * DEADBEAT

and the Federation of Associations of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE)

  * ILF (INFORMATION LIBERATION FRONT)
  * BLACKNET (INTERNET ESPIONAGE COORDINATION HEADQUARTERS)
  * BLOODNET (CYBERSPATIAL BLACK MARKETEERING AND LIQUIDATION SQUAD)
  * CRAM (CYBERSPATIAL REALITY ADVANCEMENT MOVEMENT)
  * CRaP (CYBERANARCHIST REPRESSION AND POISON)
  * CY{B,PH}ER{PU,WO}NKS

===

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS *
     * GRISLY DEATH TORTURE * JUDGEMENT DAY * APOCALYPSE NOW *

INTRODUCING

===

    #####       ####       ##  ##      ####       #####      ##  ##
   ###         ##  ##      ##  ##       ##       ###         ##  ## 
    ####       ##  ##      ##  ##       ##        ####       ######
      ###      ##  ##      ##  ##       ##          ###      ##  ##
   #####        ###\\       ####       ####      #####       ##  ##
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Introducing the SECRETLY QUIZZICAL UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT!

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * ENDLESS ENTERTAINMENT *

CONTENTS
========

- INTRODUCTION
- UPDATES
- DEADLINE
- THE CASH PRIZE
- MORE ABOUT `SQUISH' & `FACE'
- QUESTIONS


===

The recent WHITE HOT interest by multiple groups and individuals in the 

		 CYBERANARCHIST TENTACLE INFILTRATIONS

into the Internet have inspired an EXCITING NEW CONTEST and COMPETITION!

we, the Federation of Associations of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE), 
announce the 

	SUPREMELY QUACKY UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT! (SQUISH)


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * FAMOUS PARTICIPANTS *


UPDATES
===

  updates on the SQUISH contest will be posted regularly. Send in
  notice of the more spectacular point accumulations with proof for
  verifications immediately and the Halls of Fame and Shame.
  Unverified points are not valid toward the cash prize.


DEADLINE
===

  TIME IS RUNNING OUT! AVOID INQUIRING FURTHER OR WAITING FOR FURTHER
  INSTRUCTIONS. START IMMEDIATELY! MONTHS OF PARTICIPATION ARE
  REQUIRED TO ACCUMULATE COMPETITIVE STANDING. SOME PARTICIPANTS
  ALREADY HAVE A HEAD START.
  
  THE CASH PRIZE WILL BE AWARDED APRIL 1, 1994. FURTHER INCREMENTS
  WILL BE AWARDED AT YEARLY INTERVALS THEREAFTER.


MORE ABOUT `SQUISH' AND `FACE'
===

  The Federation of Associations of Cyberspace, Everywhere was founded
  in 1994 as a group that coordinates the activities among the many
  different online organizations. We have played a very low-profile
  role to date, and wanted to find some way of promoting our newfound
  alliance. We have groups combined from BBSes, local area networks,
  the Internet, and other global and local networks around the world
  (see below).

  We have built up some membership funds from the contributing
  organizations and private contributions to provide the prize money
  for SQUISH, and some private individuals have donated significant
  amounts. The contest was inspired by S.Boxx, who was the architect
  of point classifications and the current opponent lists. S.Boxx has
  also promised to provide any funds necessary for the successful
  completion of the contest. We hope that recent interest into snakes
  and tentacles by many on the Internet will make the contest
  spirited entertainment and a strong success.

  We encourage reporters and the media to use this announcement as our
  official press release. Feel free to redistribute or comment on
  this announcement in any forum.


QUESTIONS
===

  Address further questions to cypherpunks@toad.com, gnu@toad.com,
  tcmay@netcom.com, or hughes@ah.com. Some additional information is
  available in RISKS 15.25, 15.27, 15.28x: ftp CRVAX.SRI.COM, login
  anonymous, directory RISKS: (include the colon), file RISKS-i.j

===

    /////       ////       //  //      ////       /////      //  //
   ///         //  //      //  //       //       ///         //  // 
    ////       //  //      //  //       //        ////       //////
      ///      //  //      //  //       //          ///      //  //
   /////        ///\\       ////       ////      /////       //  //
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
       Introducing the STELLARLY QUOTABLE INTERNET SNAKE HUNT!

===

Brought to you as a coordinated effort between the individuals

  * S.BOXX
  * MEDUSA
  * INFOCALYPSE
  * THE EXECUTIONER
  * PABLO ESCOBAR
  * DEADBEAT

and the Federation of Associations of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE)

  * ILF (INFORMATION LIBERATION FRONT)
  * BLACKNET (INTERNET ESPIONAGE COORDINATION HEADQUARTERS)
  * BLOODNET (CYBERSPATIAL BLACK MARKETEERING AND LIQUIDATION SQUAD)
  * CRAM (CYBERSPATIAL REALITY ADVANCEMENT MOVEMENT)
  * CRaP (CYBERANARCHIST REPRESSION AND POISON)
  * CY{B,PH}ER{PU,WO}NKS

===

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS *
     * GRISLY DEATH TORTURE * JUDGEMENT DAY * APOCALYPSE NOW *

NOTICE: PLEASE IMMEDIATELY REDISTRIBUTE THIS ANNOUNCEMENT TO
  ALL CYBERSPATIAL OUTLETS.

===

    #####       ####       ##  ##      ####       #####      ##  ##
   ###         ##  ##      ##  ##       ##       ###         ##  ## 
    ####       ##  ##      ##  ##       ##        ####       ######
      ###      ##  ##      ##  ##       ##          ###      ##  ##
   #####        ###\\       ####       ####      #####       ##  ##
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Introducing the SUPREMELY QUACKY UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT!

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * ENDLESS ENTERTAINMENT *

CONTENTS
========

- - INTRODUCTION
- - OBJECT OF SQUISH
- - SQUISH DIRECTIONS
- - POINTS & SCORING
  . SECRET PROJECTS (CONSPIRACIES)
  . SUSPECTED ACCOMPLICES (SMALL FRIES)
  . SUSPECTED FAKE ADDRESSES (SNAKES AND TENTACLES)
  . SUSPECTED ASSOCIATES (MEDUSA'S SISTERS)
  . SUSPECTED LEADERS (BIG MACS)
  . SUSPECTED MASTERMIND (MEDUSA)
  . SUSPECTED CORRUPT SITES (POISON NEEDLES)
  . PLAYFIELD MAP (KILLING FIELDS, INFECTED OUTLETS, CRIME SCENES)
  . ATTACKS (TICKLES, POKES, COUNTERMEASURES)
  . RATINGS (SQUIRMS AND CONTORTIONS)
  . BALDFACED LIE BONUS POINTS
  . STELLAR HYPOCRISY AWARDS
  . BIG AND BLOODY BETRAYALS
  . THE SMALL PRINT ON POINTS
- - A NOTE ABOUT YOUR OPPONENTS
- - UPDATES
- - THE CASH PRIZE
- - DEADLINE
- - MORE ABOUT `SQUISH' & `FACE'
- - QUESTIONS


===

The recent WHITE HOT interest by multiple groups and individuals in the 

		 CYBERANARCHIST TENTACLE INFILTRATIONS

into the Internet have inspired an EXCITING NEW CONTEST and COMPETITION!

we, the Federation of Associations of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE), 
announce the 

	SUPREMELY QUACKY UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT! (SQUISH)


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * FAMOUS PARTICIPANTS *

===
OBJECT OF SQUISH

  the OBJECT of SQUISH is to find TENTACLES and SNAKES.  A TENTACLE is
  an email address used by a real person for the purpose of
  concealing their identity from others. A SNAKE is a TENTACLE that
  is particularly wicked and evil and will lie and trick others into
  believing the TENTACLE is real. In words, the more consequential
  and malicious a TENTACLE, the more it is a SNAKE.

  Different points are awarded for playing. Anyone who can send mail
  can play! The simplest and cheapest points come from sending email
  to suspected  SNAKES and TENTACLES, and chalking up points
  depending on the responses. Larger points are awarded for `real
  world' interactions such as calling  suspected tentacles and snakes
  at their telephone numbers. The largest points of all are awared
  for finding tentacle infiltrations into important Internet and real
  world outlets such as journals and news magazines!

  When a snake or tentacle gets upset in response to mail, it is said
  to be QUIVERING. It will go through CONTORTIONS to convince you to
  leave it alone and may begin to SQUIRM if you persist. When people
  are not writing through fake email addresses, they are said to be
  using their TRUE NAME. TRUE NAMES may go through quivering,
  contortions, and squirming too. Sometimes snakes or tentacles may
  threaten to stop using an email account entirely. If they do they
  are said to SELF DESTRUCT or be EXORCIZED DEMONS (these are
  extremely rare). The TRUE NAME of a person behind a tentacle is
  also called the MOTHER or the MONSTER.
  
  Some of the TRUE NAMES are BIG MACS and some are SMALL FRIES. Much
  larger points are awarded for exposing the BIG MACS, but some
  points are available for SMALL FRIES. BIG MACS are famous people on
  the Internet-- people that no one would expect have snakes and
  tentacles, or have media stories written about them. Massive points
  are awarded for BIG MAC exposures.
  
  When different MOTHERS and MONSTERS send out TENTACLE-GRAMS or
  SNAKEMAIL, they are said to be MOLESTING people. Sometimes the BIG
  MACS molest followers, SMALL FRIES, or even other BIG MACS.
  Sometimes they molest unsuspecting INNOCENT BYSTANDERS, this is
  called RAPING VIRGINS. When a lot of MONSTERS get together in  a
  pack and attack, it is called GANG RAPE. A MONSTER commenting on
  himself through snakemail or replying to one of his own postings is
  called INBREEDING. When BIG MACS are involved it is called INCEST.
  
  Anyone who knows about a tentacle or other CONSPIRACY, an `insider',
  is called TAINTED. People who don't know are called CLEAN. Some
  CLEAN and BYSTANDERS are particularly NAIVE and believe everything
  that BIG MACS and MEDUSA says, they are called BRAINWASHED. The
  ones that defend BIG MACS and MEDUSA are called BLIND. Those
  that simply don't care are called BRAIN DEAD.
  
  Many of the TRUE NAMES and BIG MACS promote various philosophies
  that are directly opposed to their actual actions. They are called
  STELLAR HYPOCRITES, and points are awarded for uncovering them.
  Some of the BIG MACS even regularly betray their BRAINWASHED and
  BRAINDEAD defenders and apologists and even fellow BIG MACS. The
  followers who are striving to become BIG MACS themselves are 
  called WANNABES. They are called TRAITORS guilty of HIGH TREASON.
  Valuable points are award for players who ATTACK the STELLAR
  HYPOCRITES  or BIG MACS using such strategies as TICKLING, POKING,
  and COUNTERMEASURES like name calling, negative publicity, public
  and private pressure, smear campaigns, mudslinging, humiliation,
  exposure, etc.

  Matches take place in Cyberspace on the PLAYFIELD, with different
  regions consisting of INFECTED OUTLETS, CRIME SCENES, and KILLING
  FIELDS. A KILLING FIELD is a place where a tentacle and a player
  compete or a Big Mac is assaulted. INFECTED OUTLETS are media
  outlets or journals that carry BIG MAC propaganda, disinformation,
  or lies. A CRIME SCENE is a place where provably illegal activity
  takes place, e.g. someone passes a bribe. The more trusted an
  INFECTED OUTLET, the more INSIDIOUS the lie. Some INFECTED OUTLETS
  are particularly corrupt, they are called TOXIC WASTE DUMPS.

  The grand point prizes go to anyone who can expose MEDUSA. MEDUSA is
  the leader of all SMALL FRIES and BIG MACS, a wicked, evil
  incarnation of SATAN on the Internet. She is the originator and
  chief proseletyzer of the art, science, and religion of lies.
  MEDUSA has dozens of SNAKES  all over the Internet, particularly in
  extremely sensitive areas such as Internet protocol development
  (e.g. mercantile or digital cash protocols), posting from public
  access sites and even `covers' and `front' sites, these are called
  POISON NEEDLES. Corrupt administrators are always either BIG MACS
  or SMALL FRIES. Some sites have administrators who are unaware or
  apathetic toward infiltrations, these are called PAWNS.
  
  When MEDUSA infiltrates many sites and spews extremely  dangerous
  disinformation and propaganda, this is called SABOTAGE. Telling
  people to go somewhere else and dominating conversations with
  irrelevant topics is called STRANGLING or GANG RAPE. Stealing
  sensitive information from others is called ESPIONAGE. Sabotage,
  strangling, espionage, and other types of cyberterrorism are called
  POISON. MEDUSA hides her activities beneath the various phrases
  PRIVACY FOR THE MASSES, the CRYPTOGRAPHIC REVOLUTION, and
  CRYPTOANARCHY in respectable media outlets like Wired and the New
  York Times. Sometimes this is accomplished by fooling reporters,
  but note that not all reporters are CLEAN, and bribery may be
  possible.
  
  MEDUSA is the orchestrator of a MASSIVE INTERNATIONAL CONSPIRACY to
  STRANGLE, SABOTAGE, and POISON THE INTERNET. Anyone who can drive
  MEDUSA and all the corrupt BIG MACS from Cyberspace and the real
  world forever is called THE SAVIOR and said to have DRIVEN THE
  PHARISEES FROM THE TEMPLE. However, the player must avoid being
  CRUCIFIED or the cash award will not be given.

  POINTS can be traded in for COLD CASH. The first person with more
  than  500 points gets A DOLLAR PER POINT (some restrictions apply,
  not valid in all areas, void where prohibited by law, taxes may
  vary).


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
     * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * MYSTERIES OF THE UNKNOWN *

===

SQUISH DIRECTIONS

1. Consult the list of SUSPECTED SMALL FRIES, BIG MACS, SNAKES,
  TENTACLES, MEDUSA & SISTERS, and POISON NEEDLES below. Send mail to
  any attempting to discover whether they are real or fake, or have
  knowledge of other BIG MACS or even MEDUSA. 

2. When you get CONTORTIONS or SQUIRMS, or mount COUNTERMEASURES,
  keep track of your all your points in a file. Ratings are listed
  under RATINGS below. List the persons and email addresses involved
  and quote the actual mail. Keep permanent and complete records of
  all mail.

3. Where possible, record phone numbers and call tentacles. Special
  bonus points are awarded when the snake owner is not in the same
  state as the snake, and you can prove it.

4. The biggest points are awarded for the greatest deceptions. Some
  snakes in the lists below (the most deceitful ones) have actually
  installed out-of-state phone numbers, developed software for
  coordination, and have an international arsenal of infiltration
  points.

5. In particular go after the BIG MACS and MEDUSA, where the most
  fantastic points are awarded. Some BIG MACS know of MEDUSA; they
  are called MEDUSA'S SISTERS.

6. if a suspected TENTACLE or SNAKE *ever* admits to being a tentacle
  or snake, they are not valid. This game only applies to tentacles
  and snakes who play the game themselves with QUIVERING, SQUIRMS,
  and CONTORTIONS.

7. The categories listed below of SUSPECTED SNAKES, TENTACLES,
  ACCOMPLICES, BIG MACS, and  MEDUSA are not conclusive or
  definitive. In particular, some people in these lists may be
  INNOCENT BYSTANDERS, and their harassment should be minimized. But,
  be careful! the SNAKES, TENTACLES, ACCOMPLICES, BIG MACS, and
  MEDUSA will all claim to be INNOCENT BYSTANDERS.

8. The best players and highest awards are recorded periodically in
  the HALL OF SHAME.

(rules subject to change without notice. watch for further
announcements.)


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * SECRET CONSPIRACIES *


* * *


SECRET PROJECTS (CONSPIRACIES)
===

BLACKNET - a cyberspatial espionage, extortion, blackmail, and
  terror organization founded by T.C.MAY, who is obsessed with
  sabotage and subversive goals on the Internet and in Cyberspace.
  Points are awarded for:

2  Quote and info on T.C.May from Wired, Village Voice, and NYT.
3  The introduction notice to Blacknet. 
3  Claim by T.C.May that Blacknet is no longer active or other current
    updates. 

CYPHERPUNKS -- see CYBERANARCHISTS.

DAVID CHAUM - a respected researcher that the CYPHERPUNKS claim is
  affiliated with them and is helping them set up banks in the U.S.
  Points:

2  Any quote on the cypherpunks. 
3  A quote that denies any affiliation or is negative about their
    subversive goals. 
5  Evidence that he is actually masterminding a secret penetration
    into the U.S. via the cypherpunks. 
5  Anything on the affiliation between Eric Hughes and David Chaum,
    including a visit by E.Hughes to the Chaum research laboratory. 

SECRET MAILING LISTS - a set of lists maintained by the cypherpunks to
  surreptiously promote their subversive aims. Maintained by
  E.Hughes. Topics  include an encryption phone, the Credit Union,
  etc.

2  Denial by E.Hughes of the existence of the lists
3  Join any mail list, monitor traffic
5  A list of all the lists and email addresses and instructions to
    subscribe 

PORNOGRAPHY SERVER - a Cyberanarchist idea to set up a server to
  deliver pornography over the Internet for a fee.
  
2  Mention of the server
2  Mention of pornography as `natural' or a `basic human need'
3  Information on the development of the server

CYPHERPUNK CREDIT UNION - a project underway by the CYPHERPUNKS to get
  a  Internet commerce system started that is conducive to black
  marketeering, tax evasion, destruction of governments, and money
  laundering. Points:

1  Mail from anyone on the subject.
2  Information on the leaders and actual goals. 
3  Information on the current status. 
5  Evidence of criminal activity 

CYBERANARCHISTS - a group of people interested in black
  marketeering, tax evasion, destruction of governments, pornography
  distribution, all in the name of `privacy for the masses' and the
  `cryptographic revolution'.  They believe that the use of fake
  names is constitutionally guaranteed, and have made an art,
  science, and relgion of it.  They also believe they have a right to
  lie to the media, and have infiltrated Wired and NYT articles with
  disinformation and propaganda. They also are drug apologists.
  Points awarded for:

1  Cyberanarchist propaganda 
2  Disinformation 
3  propaganda from a proven tentacle or snake 
4  disinformation from a proven tentacle or snake 
5  Disinformation or propaganda from a Big Mac or Medusa 

BRIBERY - The Cyberanarchists may be bribing reporters to get their
  fake stories into media outlets.

CRYPTOANARCHY,CRYPTOANARCHIST - a name invented by T.C.May for
  cyberanarchists, emphasizing the technological aspects (Chaumian
  subterfuges, public key  cryptography, signatures, etc.)

INFILTRATE AND SABOTAGE - what Cyberanarchists do to mailing lists
  and newsgroups. They attack others, post subtle or overt propaganda
  and disinformation, etc. Points:

1  Instances in newsgroups 
2  Instances of sabotage on insensitive mailing lists - no protocol 
    development 
3  Instances on sensitive lists - public internet development 
4  Instances on secret supersensitive lists - e.g. internal company
    lists, CERT, etc. 

note: point values are subject to change without notice. some new categories
may be added. some points may be decreased, some increased.

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * BIZARRE MONSTROSITIES *


SUSPECTED ACCOMPLICES (SMALL FRIES)
===

1  Steve Klingsporn <moofie@apple.com>
2  Geoff Dale <plaz@netcom.com>

  Klingsporn and Dale are housemates and were involved in the defense
  of the known tentacle szabo@netcom.com. Dale appears to have close
  ties to the  T.C.May Big Mac. Klingsporn has some knowledge but is
  mostly uninvolved.


SUSPECTED FAKE ADDRESSES (SNAKES AND TENTACLES)
===

5  Caleb@sidefx.sidefx.com

  A Canadian tentacle and infiltration site of T.C.May's. No 
  prominent profile known.

6  Jamie Dinkelacker <jamie@netcom.com>

  Not particularly interesting any more either except that he has a
  phone number and has close ties to T.C.May. In fact, very likely he
  is a T.C.May tentacle. Very arrogant, obnoxious, and cruel. 
  Delights in torture. Puerile threats.

7  Matthew B. Landry <mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu>

  Landry has a telephone number in Washington, and supposedly goes to
  school there. He is a suspected T.C.May tentacle. He has posted to
  the Cypherpunks list in the past. He is highly dangerous and will
  tell lies to gain sympathy or credibility and then betray later.
  Not particularly interesting any more but was involved in some
  extremely grotesque inbreeding with T.C.May on the cypherpunks
  list.

8  Peter Bachman <pbachman@skidmore.EDU>

  P.Bachman has contributed to the Society for Electronic Access list
  and others. He is actually a tentacle. Maybe a P.Metzger snake.
  Most disturbingly he has infiltrated RISKS.

9  Nick Collision <mathew@mantis.co.uk>

  Nick Collision has also infiltrated RISKS. A tentacle, but unknown
  origin-- possibly a T.C.May snake. Supposedly lives in the United
  Kingdom somewhere but refuses to comment specifically or give a
  phone number. Edits the alt.atheist FAQ (atheism is another classic
  Cyberanarchist philosophy). If Collision is a proven tentacle, the
  cyberanarchist infiltration is provably international in scope,
  with fake domain fronts. No known jobs have ever been performed
  by the `software consultants' at mantis.co.uk.

10  Arthur Chandler <arthurc@crl.com>

  On the Future Culture list and Cypherpunks. probably an E.Hughes
  tentacle. This may be a wedge into discovering credit or SMTP
  software manipulations by Cypherpunks.

11  Greg Broiles <greg@ideath.goldenbear.com>

  Probably a snake of Medusa. Has intimate knowledge of fake email
  address use, knows about customized software, and has bizarre
  Cyberanarchist  theories relating to human punishment. Strong
  knowledge of Macintosh software and hardware.

12  Eli Brandt <ebrandt@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>

  Definitely has high level knowledge of the Big Macs and Medusa.
  Probably an E.Hughes tentacle. Once wrote, `I AM MEDUSA,
  CONTROLLER OF ALL TENTACLES'.

13  Paul Ferguson <ferguson@icm1.icp.net>

  Another highly dangerous tentacle. Known to steal resumes. One of
  the Washington sites besides M.Landry. Known to have posted 
  cyberanarchist propaganda on the PEM development list.

14  Nick Szabo <szabo@netcom.com>

  The Szabo tentacle is one of the most persistent of all. Even after
  being exposed the `mother monster' continues to post, because a
  fairly significant reputation investment has been established under
  the name. Has strong interest in digital cash. Has admitted to
  knowledge of fake name use. Probably a T.C.May tentacle.

15  Hal Finney <hfinney@shell.portal.com>

  Finney is either a tentacle or an accomplice. If he is a tentacle he
  is the most treasured one of all. Involved in the defense of the
  jamie@netcom.com tentacle. Possibly an E.Hughes snake. Supposedly
  has contributed significant code to anonymous remailers and
  Zimmermann's PGP. (If he is a tentacle, Zimmermann has been
  fooled.) May even be Medusa's snake.


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * GROTESQUE PERVERSIONS *


SUSPECTED ASSOCIATES (MEDUSA'S SISTERS)
===

20  Jim McCoy <mccoy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>

  A `nerdy' cyberanarchist who does things such as sleep in his
  clothes. Close ties to D.Barnes in Texas. They are working on their
  own digital bank in competition and cooperation with CA
  cyphrepunks. Longtime Usenet poster. Knowledgeable on the most 
  serious subversive activities.

21  Doug Barnes <cman@io.com>

  D.Barnes is a lackey for Big Macs and Medusa. He may attack
  postmasters and coworkers at participating SQUISH player sites.
  Sysadmin of the io.com site. Introduced to fake addresses by
  E.Hughes.

22  Perry Metzger <pmetzger@lehman.com>

  Metzger is the pit bull of the Internet. He has perfected the
  cyberspatial ad hominem attack. He has close ties to all the Big
  Macs and is probably aware of who Medusa is. His own tentacles and
  snakes are minor in comparison. Likes the mailbomb as a threat and
  attack. Probably involved in anonymous phone threats.

23  Bill Stewart <wcs@anchor.ho.att.com>

  This is a very dangerous insider, who has close affiliations with
  the Big Macs and a prestigious job at AT&T. Has claimed to have
  seen  known tentacles and snakes at Cypherpunk parties and even
  seen their driver's licenses. Classic cyberanarchist propaganda
  outlet.


SUSPECTED LEADERS (BIG MACS)
===

25  Stanton McCandlish <mech@eff.org>

  Probably on the secret cypherpunk development lists. Maybe 
  knowledgeable about deceptions by other Big Macs. EFF online
  activist. Definite cyberanarchist apologist and sympathizer.

26  John Gilmore <gnu@toad.com>

  Cyberanarchist, built up Cygnus support. Admitted drug user.
  Probable snake charmer. Generally more ethical and moral than other
  Big Macs. May be a wedge into them.

27  T.C.May <tcmay@netcom.com>

  Close personal friend of E.Hughes. Worked for Intel and is a
  millionaire in stock values. May be financing the major
  international fake address  infrastructure. Probably manipulating
  dozens of tentacles. May have hired actors and forged drivers
  license to defend tentacles.



SUSPECTED MASTERMIND (MEDUSA)
===

40  Eric Hughes <hughes@soda.berkeley.edu> <hughes@ah.com>

  Hughes is probably the mastermind of all major tentacle
  manipulations on the Internet. Has bizarre theories about human
  punishment and law enforcement. Denies any involvement. May be
  involved in illegal credit scanning. Interested in black
  marketeering, money laundering, etc. Very terse in all mail.
  Refuses to comment on all areas. Extremely dangerous. Has
  personally established many of the corrupt sites particularly in
  WA, CA, and TX.


	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * SCANDALOUS CORRUPTION *


SUSPECTED CORRUPT SITES (POISON NEEDLES)
===

  Note: Any site supporting a snake can be corrupt, so that proven
  snakes lead to proven corrupt sites (see above). Those listed below
  are only the more serious ones.

0  netcom.com

  Paradise for cyberanarchists. Cheap, unauthenticated accounts
  indistinguishable from the real people. `Privacy' never violated so
  far by the Pawns. Close proximity to the CA cypherpunks. Home of
  dozens of snakes and tentacles. Cyberanarchist Central.

10  io.com

  D.Barnes' site. Lots of other fake addresses from inconsequential
  tentacles not listed above.
  
40  mantis.co.uk

  Supposedly a group of software consultants, but probably a 
  cyberanarchist front. Could be a major wedge into the
  cyberanarchist conspiracy if exposed; has some links to the
  `Extropian' movement.

50  crl.com

  Probably corrupted by associations with E.Hughes and credit and SMTP
  tampering, based on the Chandler tentacle.

100  sun.com

  Extremely suspicious activity by sysadmins. Some probable email
  impersonation going on. Possible telephony corruptions.


PLAYFIELD MAP (KILLING FIELDS, INFECTED OUTLETS, CRIME SCENES)
===

0   Anonymous mail
0   Private Email
0   Cy{b,ph}erwonks
0   Anonymous Usenet post

1   Usenet (per group & article under true name)
1   Anonymous mailing list posts

5   Cypherpunks@toad.com

10  imp-interest@thumper.bellcore.com (Internet Mercantile Protocol)
10  Privacy Enhanced Mail development list
10  Other sensitive project development lists

20  CERT related lists

25  Talk on phone
35  Talk Face-to-Face

40   Current Underground Digest (per article)

  E.g. `Anarchy Gone Awry', `Psychopunk Manifesto' etc.

50   RISKS (per article)

  E.g. RISKS 15.25,15.27,15.28x, `Medusa's Snakes in Cyberspace,
  Medusa's Snake's Hiss, Further Inquiries into Identity on the
  Internet'
  
100  Wired

  E.g. article on the cypherpunks with nonexistent photographer,
  `protecting privacy' propaganda
  
500  New York Times

  For example, the article on the cypherpunks talking about `privacy'
  by J. Markoff.


ATTACKS (TICKLES, POKES, COUNTERMEASURES)
===

1  `Could you send me your phone number?'
1  `Who do you work for?'
1  `What do you work on?'
1  `Where do you live?'
1  `Who do you know?'
1  `How long have you had your account?'

3  `Go to hell, Medusa'
3  `Get away from me, Darth Vadar'
3  `I will never join the Dark Side'
4  `You are a baldfaced liar'
4  `black marketing is black filth'
4  `this is a toxic waste dump'
4  `stop the insidious poison!'

10  `you are all liars'
10  `Big Mac so-and-so is a traitor'
15  `cyberanarchists are money launderers'
15  `fake names are like drugs'
15  `fake names are like sodomy'
15  `fake names are like child molesting'
15  `Big Macs are like Nazis'
15  `Big Macs are homosexuals'
15  `Big Macs are drug users'

20  `Death to tentacles'
20  `Death to cyberanarchists'
20  `Death to Medusa'
25  Long expose with lots of hypothetical insinuations
30  Published rant against cyberanarchy

100  News article: `The cyberanarchist conspiracy'
200  Retrospective article: `what went wrong?'


RATINGS (SQUIRMS AND CONTORTIONS)
===

Note: for effective score add the number associated above with the
  Small Fry, snake, tentacle, Big Mac or Medusa, poison needle, and 
  the field, outlet, scene, and hypocrisy, lie, or betrayal involved (below) to
  the points below-- i.e. the more important targets involve the most
  points.

Points

0      No response to email
1      Refuses to give out phone number of self 
1      Refuses to give out email address of someone
1      Whine about `invading privacy'
1      Whine about `stalking'
1      Whine about `witchunt'
1      Whine about `McCarthyism'
1      Whine about `Inquisition'
1      Whine about `paranoia'
1      Whine about `ranting'
1      Whine about `your long posts'
1      Deny being snake or tentacle
1      Evade question of being snake or tentacle
1      Deny any knowledge of snakes or tentacles
1      Claim that no snakes or tentacles ever existed
1      Claim that there are very few snakes or tentacles
1      Claim that snakes or tentacles are easy to identify
1      Claim that no one cares who has snakes or tentacles
1      Claim that those who have tentacles are genetically superior
1      Claim that tentacles and snakes are the `new world order'
1      Claim that you are a hypocrite for having tentacles
1      Tell you not to get worried or upset about tentacles

1      Claim that you are an12070, S.Boxx
1      Listing circumstantial evidence to prove you are S.Boxx
1      Tedious style analysis to prove you are S.Boxx
1      `The Usenet Mantra, Live with it, applies'
1      `That which cannot be enforced should be not prohibited'
1      `Better to live with tentacles than ban them'
1      `No one should be limited in tentacles'
1      `Those who think tentacles should be limited are deluded'
1      `Tentacles are like harmless pseudonyms, e.g. Publius'
1      Talk about `projecting personalities'
1      References to science fiction, e.g. Ender's Game (Card)
1      Evade question of any Big Macs or Medusa
1      Deny any knowledge of Big Macs or Medusa
1      snakemail message identified

2      `please stop!'
2      `Everyone you have accused is real.'
2      Evades question, who is real in particular?
2      Gives you phone number of self 
2      Refuses to give you phone number
2      Calls you insane
2      inbreeding
3      Calls you insane to postmaster or employer
3      `I have personally met everyone you accuse.'
3      Evades question, who is that?
3      Yells at your sysadmin on phone
3      Tells you a known tentacle is real 
3      Calls you `insane' on Usenet group or list
3      Calls you `dangerous' on Usenet group or list
3      `people are really pissed off at you'
3      incest

4      Tells of seeing ID presented by tentacle suspect
4      `Seen at cypherpunk party' 
4      You talk on phone
4      Proof of snake or tentacle
4      Yells at your close friends
4      Get close friend of accomplice to put on pressure
4      Refers to your nonexistent `violent death threats'
4      Tells you they have a gun
4      Evades question on having snakes or tentacles
4      denies having snakes or tentacles
4      Yells at someone who doesn't know you about you
4      virgin rape
4      Sysadmin Pawn says, `who cares?'
4      refuse to respond to accusations of being a Mother Monster
4      evade accusations of Mother Monster with evasions
4      Employer says, `what's going on?'
4      `I heard some people are planning something against you'

5      face-to-face talk
5      outright lie
5      Uncover proof suspected accomplice is involved 
5      Proof of fake ID 
5      Proof of Internet front site
5      Employer yells at someone
5      `I deny everything'
5      `I'm really concerned about you.'
5      `Refusal to answer is not evasion. Bye.'
5      `Your assertions are too bizarre to believe'
5      `he's/you're out of control'
5      `he's/you're a paranoid lunatic'
5      `he's/you're a psychopathic stalker'
5      `there is no conspiracy'
5      `I am your father, Luke, join the Dark Side'
5      Yell at someone uninvolved and clueless but high up
5      innocent bystander feelings hurt
5      braindead, blind, or brainwashed follower identified

10     Big Mac whines publicly
10     Big Mac says anything about Tentacles or Snakemail
10     Big Mac says anything publicly
10     Anonymous death threat (general)
10     tentacle threatens to self destruct
10     Big Mac caught molesting a follower with tentacle
10     Sign of paranoia in Small Fry
10     Mailbomb
10     Sendsys bomb
15     sabotage, poison, strangling
15     account is revoked under pressure
15     Proof of Big Mac hiring actor 
15     Proof of out-of-state phone number for tentacle
15     Proof of media deception 
15     Link the accomplice with a Big Mac 
15     Link the accomplice with Medusa 
15     Death threat by tentacle
15     tentacle self-destructs
15     Big Mac caught molesting a Small Fry with tentacle
15     Big Mac asks with tentacle, `do you like Big Mac so-and-so?'
15     Big Mac says to other Big Mac, `what are we going to do?'
15     Big Mac explains fake mail techniques in Snakemail
15     sign of paranoia in Big Mac
15     gang rape
15     pawn begins to wonder

20     Proof of completely corrupt sysadmin and site
20     Proof of illegal activity by accomplice 
20     Death threat by accomplice
20     Proof of bribed reporter
20     Big Mac caught molesting another Big Mac
20     Big Mac quivers over homosexual or drug use accusations
20     Big Mac to another Big Mac in email: `I want to kill him.'
20     Big Mac develops Snakemail software
25     get attention of real reporter
25     Proof of illegal activity by Big Mac 
25     Death threat by Big Mac
25     Proof of illegal impersonation (rare)
25     toxic waste dump identified
25     pawn starts to take action (rare)
50     Proof two Big Macs are homosexual lovers
50     Proof Big Mac is a drug user
50     Proof of Medusa
50     virgin rape by Medusa
50     reporter apologizes for errors (rare)
50     reporter is caught passing lies knowingly (rare)
75     Convince many outsiders of real Medusa
75     Proof of illegal activity by Medusa
75     Death threat by Medusa
75     Big Mac admits to homosexuality or drug use
75     Reporter writes story about conspiracy
75     Reporter is fired for being tainted

100    Stop Medusa on the Internet
100    Testify against Big Mac at any criminal trial
500    Cause Medusa to go to trial for criminal activity
500    Give pivotal damning evidence at Medusa trial
1000   Put Medusa in jail
2000   Kill Medusa
2000   Medusa goes certifiably insane
2000   You go certifiably insane
5000   Medusa tells you to commit suicide
5000   Cause Medusa to commit suicide
5000   You get murdered by a hired assassin of Medusa
10000  You get murdered by Medusa personally
20000  You get murdered and become a martyr as famous as Jesus Christ
25000  Medusa goes to hell forever
25000  You fulfill the prophecies of Nostradamus
50000  You fulfill the prophecies of the Apocalypse
50000  You go to heaven forever


BALDFACED LIE BONUS POINTS
===

1   Cyberanarchist nobody says, `your writing sucks'
1   Cyberanarchist idiot says, `nobody reads your posts'
1   Cyberanarchist vulture says, `your long posts are worthless'
5   Cyberanarchist weasel says, `I'm really concerned about you'
20  Medusa says, `I'm concerned about you.'
20  Colorado Cyberanarchist wannabe says, `everyone told me to do it.'
25  szabo@netcom.com says, `I have never pseudospoofed'
40  Medusa says, `I have never communicated under any other name'
50  Medusa says, `I will stop if you just tell me this...'
75  P.Metzger says, `szabo@netcom.com is Geoff Dale's roommate'
75  B.Stewart says, `I saw Szabo's driver's license'

STELLAR HYPOCRISY AWARDS
===

1   Cyberanarchist proofs that S.Boxx == You
5   Someone who promotes privacy invades yours
5   Someone who promotes privacy works to destroy it
5   Someone who attacks the government lives in the U.S.
5   Cyberanarchists complain about anonymous smear campaigns
10  Someone who advocates filtering doesn't filter you
10  Someone who vilifies you complains of vilification
10  Someone who is a pit bull says you are a psychopath
10  Colorado wannabe says, `I am not the leader'

15  A criminal calls you a hypocrite
15  An atheist uses Biblical references to Judgement
15  A cyberanarchist says, `who are you to judge me?'
15  A cyberanarchist talks about `casting the first stone'
15  A cyberanarchist talks about honesty
15  Cyberanarchists whine about persecution
15  Cyberanarchists post to imp-interest or cypherwonks lists
     instead of cypherpunks
15  Medusa says, `you have to learn some quality in your posts or
     I will censor you.'
15  Colorado Cyberanarchist wannabe throws you off his mailing list
     without notice.

20  Someone interested in cryptographic security says `spoofing is
     a way of life'
20  Someone complains about `invaded privacy' when you announce they 
     mailbombed or lied to you
20  Medusa says, `I don't want brainwashed followers'
25  Big Macs say they are not really Big Macs
25  Braindead, blind, and brainwashed followers say the Big Macs are
     not really Big Macs
25  Braindead, blind, and brainwashed followers say they not
     accomplices
50  Someone who pretends to be your friend betrays you

BIG AND BLOODY BETRAYALS
===

20  P.Honeyman: `Whatever you do,I'm on your side'
25  E.Hughes says, `You are forcing me to censor you.'
25  T.C.May says, `I am tired of your rants. Stop sending me mail.'
30  M.Landry: `I am doing all I can'
30  G.Broiles: `Too bad about you and EH'
35  Hal Finney says, `jamie@netcom.com is real. You are insane.'
40  D.Barnes calls up university administrator and previous employer
40  Geoff Dale says, `Everyone you accuse is real'
40  S.Klingsporn says, `You are wrong. szabo@netcom.com is real.'
50  Big Mac says, `Refusal to answer is not dishonesty. Bye.'

THE SMALL PRINT ON POINTS
===

  All point values are subject to change without notice. some new
  categories may be added. some points may be decreased, some
  increased.

A NOTE ABOUT YOUR OPPONENTS
===

  The entities listed above, i.e. your opponents in SQUISH, are
  extremely sophisticated and have years of practice in fake email
  address use, and have learned how to rebuff and thwart even the
  most determined inquiries. They have extremely powerful resources
  at their disposal, including dozens of public access acounts, front
  sites, cover stories, and automated software for identity tracking,
  and sizeable investments in hardware and their own countermeasures.
  You will be attacking their most cherished vices and lies and they
  will respond viciously. They may be involved in criminal activities
  such as credit and telephony tampering, forgery, impersonation,
  fraud, etc. Beware of dangerous hazards they have erected or may
  hurl at you.


UPDATES
===

  updates on the SQUISH contest will be posted regularly. Send in
  notice of the more spectacular point accumulations with proof for
  verifications immediately and the Halls of Fame and Shame.
  Unverified points are not valid toward the cash prize.


THE CASH PRIZE
===

  A cash prize will be awarded to the first person to surpass 500
  points, one dollar per point. The person may continue playing to
  continue to gain cash. Further awards may be presented to close
  contenders. Some restrictions apply. Void where prohibited. Tax not
  included. In the case of deceased victims the award will be given
  to the nearest living relative, or the Federation of Associations
  of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE) if all relatives have met 
  mysterious fatal accidents as well. If the world economies have
  collapsed from cyberanarchist sabotage before the award is 
  granted, no further action is necessary (this constitutes the final
  sign of the Apocalypse).


DEADLINE
===

  TIME IS RUNNING OUT! AVOID INQUIRING FURTHER OR WAITING FOR FURTHER
  INSTRUCTIONS. START IMMEDIATELY! MONTHS OF PARTICIPATION ARE
  REQUIRED TO ACCUMULATE COMPETITIVE STANDING. SOME PARTICIPANTS
  ALREADY HAVE A HEAD START.
  
  THE CASH PRIZE WILL BE AWARDED APRIL 1, 1994. FURTHER INCREMENTS
  WILL BE AWARDED AT YEARLY INTERVALS THEREAFTER.


MORE ABOUT `SQUISH' AND `FACE'
===

  The Federation of Associations of Cyberspace, Everywhere was founded
  in 1994 as a group that coordinates the activities among the many
  different online organizations. We have played a very low-profile
  role to date, and wanted to find some way of promoting our newfound
  alliance. We have groups combined from BBSes, local area networks,
  the Internet, and other global and local networks around the world
  (see below).

  We have built up some membership funds from the contributing
  organizations and private contributions to provide the prize money
  for SQUISH, and some private individuals have donated significant
  amounts. The contest was inspired by S.Boxx, who was the architect
  of point classifications and the current opponent lists. S.Boxx has
  also promised to provide any funds necessary for the successful
  completion of the contest. We hope that recent interest into snakes
  and tentacles by many on the Internet will make the contest
  spirited entertainment and a strong success.

  We encourage reporters and the media to use this announcement as our
  official press release. Feel free to redistribute or comment on
  this announcement in any forum.


QUESTIONS
===

  Address further questions to cypherpunks@toad.com, gnu@toad.com,
  tcmay@netcom.com, or hughes@ah.com. Some additional information is
  available in RISKS 15.25, 15.27, 15.28x: ftp CRVAX.SRI.COM, login
  anonymous, directory RISKS: (include the colon), file RISKS-i.j

===

    /////       ////       //  //      ////       /////      //  //
   ///         //  //      //  //       //       ///         //  // 
    ////       //  //      //  //       //        ////       //////
      ///      //  //      //  //       //          ///      //  //
   /////        ///\\       ////       ////      /////       //  //
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Introducing the SUPREMELY QUACKY UNIFIED INTERNET SNAKE HUNT!

===

Brought to you as a coordinated effort between the individuals

  * S.BOXX
  * MEDUSA
  * INFOCALYPSE
  * THE EXECUTIONER
  * PABLO ESCOBAR
  * DEADBEAT

and the Federation of Associations of Cyberspace Everywhere (FACE)

  * ILF (INFORMATION LIBERATION FRONT)
  * BLACKNET (INTERNET ESPIONAGE COORDINATION HEADQUARTERS)
  * BLOODNET (CYBERSPATIAL BLACK MARKETEERING AND LIQUIDATION SQUAD)
  * CRAM (CYBERSPATIAL REALITY ADVANCEMENT MOVEMENT)
  * CRaP (CYBERANARCHIST REPRESSION AND POISON)
  * CY{B,PH}ER{PU,WO}NKS

===

	  * THOUSANDS OF CONTESTANTS * HUGE CASH PRIZES *
	 * FASCINATING DISCOVERIES * HEDONISTIC DELIGHTS * 
       * FANTASTIC FUN FOR EVERYONE * CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS *
     * GRISLY DEATH TORTURE * JUDGEMENT DAY * APOCALYPSE NOW *


Hello, my mailbox has been awfully quiet lately from cypherpunk rants,
and I need a bit of a massage at the moment, so I wanted to ask you a
question. Have you considered what I was saying about preventing
`abuse' of remailers? I have given you some time to formulate a plan. 
 
so-- could someone email me your new official Cypherpunk ethical
guidelines for anonymous posting, involving your opinions and
procedures on libel, harassment, and `violent death threats'?

what's that? you don't have an official policy or any safeguards?

I guess that means that `anything goes' (quite literally!)

kind of a disturbing policy, because someone simultaneously very
ingenious and malicious could create some major annoyances. I guess you
already know that. but even the past `operations' could pale in
comparison to future ones. the possibilities are really limitless.
imagine what can be accomplished when no one is held accountable for
what they post! why, it is a recipe for Utopia. cypherpunks, I so
admire your vision of the future.

BTW, I want to commend you anonymous site operators for your
resilience. it does appear that the remailers are fairly secure, at
least, that is the picture portrayed to `outsiders'. of course, with
insiders, it is a different story. but in a certain interesting
application of anonymous remailers, e.g. an enemy attacking the
remailers themselves, the confidentiality of identity among `insiders'
is not critical. in fact, it can be very satisfying for an enemy to
strike his foe, even while the foe sees his face, but can do nothing
about it because of his own predicament. even more delightful (for the
attacker, that is!) is the situation where the `predicament' is not
even due to the attacker, but entirely the enemy himself. in other
words, the most effective and devastating tactic of guerilla warfare is
to twist technology to get your enemy to shoot *himself*.
I am quite perplexed that Mr. Remailer Operator has sent me and my
postmaster mail about how he never intended to create a climate of `an
unruly net of irresponsibility' by running his service. He claims that
(1) I wrote the SQUISH announcement (2) I am therefore responsible for
it (3) even if posted through a remailer.

Mr. Remailer Operator, What *are* you trying to accomplish with a remailer?

All assertions disguise Mr. Remailer Operator's own responsibility to
the net. Yes, Mr. Remailer Operator, you have *responsibility*.  Mr.
Remailer Operator, if I wished to be responsible for my posting, I
would post it under my own name. But you have provided a service that
supposedly removes this accountability, by guaranteeing to me that you
will not reveal my identity to anyone.

Don't you see the reasoning? How is it that you, Mr. Remailer Operator,
can claim that the people who use your remailers are responsible for
what they post, but then defy anyone who wishes to trace them? Don't
you understand? accountability== tracability. You cannot have one
without the other. All this froth about `true names' has nothing to do
with personalities or whatever-- the root issue is *accountability* and
thereby *traceability*. Those who are not traceable are not
accountable. Those who are traceable are accountable.

By creating your remailers, Mr. Remailer Operators, you have created an
extremely volatile atmosphere on the net. You have completely failed to
address the *obvious* issues that your design entails. What if someone
mailbombs through your remailers? Sends death threats? Libel? you are
Not Accountable, right? but what does that *mean*? that you will
*allow* mailbombs, death threats, and libel through your remailers? 

I'm getting this strange sense of deja vu as I write this. When I first
joined your little conspiracy club, over a year ago now, these were
some of the first subjects I wrote about. I asked how you would deal
with anonymous death threats, mailbombs, use of your remailers by
terrorists and drug dealers, and criminals, and net.psychopaths.  But
no one was interested. Everyone denied that Mr. Remailer Operator
should ever even have to worry about these things. `Not Liable' was the catchphrase.

Mr. Remailer Operator, you didn't, and still apparently don't, seem to
realize that this is not a real answer that holds up in the real world
of use. Mr. Remailer Operator, you cannot continue to pretend that you
have no ethical or moral decisions to make in the design of technology!
Mr. Remailer Operator, you have a *duty* to consider them foremost! And
in fact, in *neglecting* your duty, Mr. Remailer Operator, in your
*negligent* design, you, Mr. Remailer Operator, are learning the *hard*
way. Isn't it kind of pathetic that you, Mr. Remailer Operator, are
just now coming face to face with the effects of *your* technology? Do
you, Mr. Remailer Operator, really believe that there is no ethics or
morality associated with the development and use of technology?

Mr. Remailer Operators, please come up with a coherent policy on the
following subjects, or expect that you remailers will be *abused* by
people *taking advantage* of your own *failures of judgement*.

- What happens when someone mailbombs someone through your remailer,
Mr. Remailer Operator?
- What happens when someone mailbombs a list through your remailer, Mr.
Remailer Operator?
- What about `libel'? What about `harassment'? What about `violent
death threats'? Mr. Remailer Operator?

You, Mr. Remailer Operators, have clung to two mutually inconsistent
philosophies-- one is that you are providing a responsible service to
the Net, that there are `positive' uses of anonymity, and that people
are going to use those, and that you will not be accountable for what
originates from your site merely by putting in disclaimers into your
messages, `I am not responsible'. All is ASCII, right? no harm can be
done by the mere existence of a remailer, right? Libel and harassment
and death threats do not exist, right?

But then when someone uses your remailer, Mr. Remailer Operator, in the
obviously malicious ways, that anyone with the tiniest smidgeon of
brain cells could anticipate, like mailbombs, massive mailing list
campaigns, libel,  violent death threats, etc., you claim that it is
Libel and Harassment and Violent Death Threats. Or, at least, someone
other than psychopunk co-conspirators-- the `in crowd'. Oh no! We have
to stop this! Yee Gad!

Obviously, the lesson is that Good Anonymity is that which can go
through Mr. Remailer Operator's remailer without upsetting Mr. Remailer
Operator or having people yell at Mr. Remailer Operator, and Bad
Anonymity is anything that upsets Mr. Remailer Operator or causes
people to yell at him. I encourage Mr. Remailer Operator to further
develop this interesting code of the Ethics of Anonymity, which he has
so far denied even exists, but by his own shrieking obviously it does!

Mr. Remailer Operators, I have long warned you about the negative
consequences of your supposed belief that No One is Responsible for
Anything on the Net, and you have found that this is simply an
untenable and unbearable philosophy from your own experience. What are
you going to do to change that?

* * *

This is not merely one of the most condescending and exasperating
messages I have ever written. It is a list of suggestions! I recommend
the following (the deja vu is thick again):

1. Remailers should *not* be able to send anything to any list on the
Lists of Lists or any other known mailing list, by default. If the
moderator approves it, the remailers are allowed.

2. Mailbombing through the remailers should be dampened with
limitations on the size of messages and the frequency.

3. The ability for *anyone* to state that they do not want to receive
anonymous mail should be *automated*-- and the remailers should act as
a *whole network* in propagating these `requests for denial' between them.

4. You should keep and pass around lists of people that have caused one
remailer operator problems, so that others have the option of denying service.

When I first proposed these ideas, they were Heretical Blasphemy. Do
you still oppose them? Do you need some more (painful) Lessons?

I ask you, Mr. Remailer Operator, *What* exactly is the purpose of a
remailer? How is it that You, the Cypherpunks, have gone this long
without really having any serious clue about what you are actually
doing? about what effect remailers actually have on cyberspatial morale
and etiquette and human relations in general? How can you deny that
Netiquette does not exist when you run your remailers, but complain and
screech at the top of your lungs about Netiquette based on what comes
out? What kind of machine, or monster, have you created, Mr. Remailer Operator?

Hello, Enemies. You have succeeded in scaring my postmaster with your
ranting and raving about `harassment', `anonymous death threats', and
`libel' from anonymous posts. You have come very close to convincing
him that somewhere in ASCII text coming out of remailers and my own
address (supposedly there is some correspondence) lies illegal strings,
and that I am allowed to post as long as what I say is `true'.

I don't understand why the cypherpunks have suddenly become so
fascinated by these subjects, regarding the subversive uses of
remailers. When I brought them up long ago, about a year ago, when I
first joined the list, no one was interested. I talked about
restricting the abuse of remailers, so that the antisocial and
psychopathic uses could be minimized or even prevented. Obviously, in
designing a remailer, the subject of `what to pass through' is a rather
obvious consideration, that operators have mostly wholly neglected.

When are you going to codify your Cypherpunk Code of Ethics, and
explain what constitutes a death threat, a libelous message? Or is it
just that the rule is, if I type it it is a violent death threat, and
libelous harassment, but if anyone else writes it there is nothing
wrong? Will the rules be devised at the next Cypherpunk Meeting? Will
Mr. May or Mr. Hughes (list moderator) grace us with some eloquent
proclamation on the subject? Will Mr. Gilmore favor you with some
enlightened musings on the topics? When are you going to police your
remailers to keep that which you call `illegal' from passing through
them? You weren't interested in `ethics' when I proposed them many
times, but I am certainly delighted with your newfound piousness.

* * *

But I am not just handing you the standard L.D. rant about Cypherpunk
Hypocrisy above (even I am growing tired and bored of pointing out your
stellar and freakish hypocrisies out so often and so easily). 

I am writing to tell you some GOOD NEWS (for you): last week you
succeeded spectacularly in attempting to censor me at my current
account. My account is still hanging by a thread. Mr. Dempsey told me
he would allow me to keep it under the constraint that the `noise
stopped' from his mailbox. But this is obviously something I cannot
guarantee (I didn't really have any other choice at the time than to
say that I would do my best), and in fact you have the power to yell
some more and perhaps cast the `final stone' that kills me `here'.

But I tell you, tear down this Temple and in three days I shall raise
it up. Why are you so maniacally attempting to get me to lose my
favorite account? Do you think it will prevent me from posting? From
using your remailers? From continuing my crusade? Aren't you being just
a tad bit naive beyond your usual hypocrisy? Isn't that you *religion*,
that if someone wants to smuggle something in Cyberspace, there is no
stopping them? Would you like me to get a netcom account? or several?
or do I already have several? Would that make your day? Don't you think
that losing my account of 4 1/2 years would really kind of piss me off,
way beyond my current wrath? That things might get *really* ugly?

So, you have a choice. Continue to harass my postmaster, and perhaps
even succeed in censoring me from my native address, the very first
Death caused by Cypherpunk Hypocrisy, and *really* piss me off. Or,
leave Mr. Dempsey alone, and figure out more proactive ways of dealing
with whatever is troubling you. Ironically, I have suggested many
myself, over my lifetime on the list and recently. The choice is up to you.
Hello, darlings. I wanted to share with you a revolutionary idea that
will sound completely alien to you, but it could help you immensely in
your perilous experience with disruptive posts to the list. Surely this
has been proposed, but been rebuffed. Why? It is a brilliant idea:

ONLY MEMBERS ARE ALLOWED TO POST.

Imagine! All those annoying remailer messages would just *vanish*!
Whoa, what a concept! Too bad it is heretical blasphemy. Anything that
stands in the way of Unaccountable Anonymity is a Bad Thing (tm).

Interestingly, if this rule were in practice on the cypherpunks list,
and `member' is taken in the sense of `email addresses', I would not
have been able to post this message. Many cypherpunks have taken great
note of the fact that I post `blindly' in the sense that I do not
subscribe under the ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu address but post
to the list anyway under it. I ask these people, though, what makes you
think that I am not receiving the delightful frenzied contortions of
late on your list through some other address? Would you call me a hypocrite?

I have never claimed that such a use is pseudospoofing-- the definition
clearly applies to *postings* and *outgoing mail*. I suppose there is
some `deception' going on if I receive mail from a different address
than from which I post if people can see the list subscribers and
assume that those who post are those on the list. But obviously, in
many scenarios, this is a ridiculous assumption, particularly here.

This brings up another question. Is the cypherpunks mailing list
private? If it is private, then it is nobodies business who is
receiving what through what addresses, and any use of different
addresses for reception (such as that I hinted I do) are completely
honest. Periodically someone discovers that they can use the SMTP EXPN
command on toad.com to get a list of everyone on the cypherpunks list
(supposedly), and suggest ever so delicately that E.Hughes, Mr. Master
Programmer, who has clutched his Stone Age Mailing List Software so
fanatically and so persistently for some incomprehensible reason, ought
to get his act together and prevent people who do not subscribe from
posting, and people from peeking at the mailing list. Is the latter an
`invasion of privacy'? In a sense the former is too.

So, I ask you cypherpunks-- is your mailing list subscriber base
`public knowledge' or not? If it isn't, then figure out a way to
conceal it; if it is, then don't complain when somebody uses it for
malicious purposes you don't like. Are outsiders allowed to post? if
they are, then stop whining at me about posting `blindly'. If they
aren't then could someone please handhold Mr. Hughes, the Master
Programmer, Mr. Cypherpunks Write Code, in getting some new mailing list software?

* * *

Of course, there are real reasons why you have Stone Age Software for
your mailing list. The first reason, as I have already alluded to, is
that Mr. Hughes is a iron-fist dictator who belligerently and
obstinately opposes any modification in the status quo that he didn't
invent in the first place. Yes, this is the kind of person who will
oppose a good idea just because someone other than himself thought of
it. And this amusing tension between him and Mr. May is most
entertaining-- the latter ever so delicately and gently attempts to
suggest some change to the list that would make it more beneficial,
that would keep out the troublemakers, but Mr. Cypherpunk God has
spoken long ago, that Nothing Shall Change.

The second reason is more obscure. The cypherpunks love to talk about
how some modifications in their software may prevent Newbies from
posting. But this is nothing but putrid hypocrisy (as usual). The
leaders do not give the slightest damn about Newbies, because Newbies
are by definition not Insiders, and they are clueless, and it takes so
much trouble to educate them, doing things like writing comprehensive
and coherent posts. This may cause people to (unjustly, or rightly?)
accuse the leaders of negligence to Newbies. The leaders have tried to
come up with comprehensive posts on certain subjects, but they prefer
to post them under their Tentacles like H.Finney to get the
commensurate increase in reputation. 

At least, E.Hughes does. T.C.May does not really have the attention
span to write anything longer than a few paragraphs or refine his
writing on any subject over a long period of time. So he instead writes
things like the `anonymity outline' to claim that he thought of
anonymous whistleblowing first, when in fact all he did was write down
the word `whistleblowing' in a long, rambling, useless salad of words.
But I digress. As for Newbies, the leaders will often post
disinformation from their tentacles suggesting that Newbies aren't
really treated like dirt, and this is actually an effective tactic
against all of the braindead idiots who subscribe to the list.

So if the list software is not changing because of Newbies, why is it
not changing? For a long time many people, myself included, attempted
to get E.Hughes, (aka God), to do something sensible like split this
list into sublists. The topic perpetually comes up. But both the
leaders are opposed to this for several reasons. T.C.May is opposed to
it because his God, E.Hughes, is opposed to it, but also because it
decreases the opportunity to tickle (or molest, depending on whether
you are S.Boxx) people with tentacles. You see, when there are a lot of
lists, it is more difficult to maintain the presence of personalities
in front of all the people you are trying to trick. It is so much
easier to have one `cypherpunk central' where H.Finney can post
something about Chaumian systems, etc., and all the Newbies can look up
in admiration.

The reason that Mr. Hughes has not barred `blind posting' is for the
same reason. Oh, the leaders love to talk about *supposed* reasons why
this is not a good idea, to ban `blind' posting. They have always
perfected their disinformation techniques to the point that they even
begin to believe their own lies. The *real* reason, of course, is that
it is another big headache for tentacle maintenance, and of course
again E.Hughe's own spectacular obstinacy. It goes against the leader's
belief that every mailing list should be open to *any* idiot that wants
to post, even if they are outside tentacles or anonymous remailers,
when in fact the uses of anonymous remailers in legitimate,
nonfrivolous groups are virtually nil. Of course, they will argue about
my claim that this is so, and I shall enjoy watching them do their
damage control with all their tentacles in response.

* * *

By the way, I have said some nasty and perhaps even LIBELOUS things in
here about Mr. Hughes, the list moderator, and his close personal
friend, T.C.May. Maybe you would like to get your lawyer to send me a
letter. So far no one has, even after J. Bowery ranted and raved and
shook his feathers in a flurry at me in the newsgroups.  I have asked,
a long time ago, that Mr. Hughes send me mail telling me to stop
posting to the list. It is amazing in all the time all the cypherpunks
have been shrieking at me, Mr. Hughes has never done so. Apparently he
believes (like I do) that all my posts are extremely constructive and
brilliantly executed. Otherwise, why does he put up with them? 

Well, he did say once that he was going to censor me on the list, but
apparently that is nothing but an empty threat. I guess he realizes how
hypocritical that would be for him to do, and how that would fit in
perfectly that the image I have been ascribing to him, the Iron Fisted
Dictator. Anyway, cypherpunks, please do not whine to me that my
Cypherpunks postings are `disruptive'. Tell the List Moderator, the
Iron Fisted Dictator, the Conspiracy Leader, the Master Medusa, Mr.
Nazi Reincarnated, the Evil One, the Antichrist, to send me or my
postmaster mail explaining why I should be Dead in Cyberspace. 

If your Leaders request that I stop posting to Cypherpunks, I will
comply. Rather simple, isn't it? Why have you not tried this approach
for so long? You did it with Helsingius and S.Boxx, didn't you? `Mr.
Helsingius, please *stop* that raving lunatic, that violent madman,
that ranting psychopath, from posting those BAD NO GOOD AWFUL NASTY
VIOLENT PSYCHOPATHIC EVIL DEATH THREAT LIBEL HARASSMENTS. 

Why don't you do it again? No one is watching. No one gives a damn what
happens to S.Boxx, anyway. You should kill him, for all I care.
Unfortunately, L.Detweiler and S.Boxx are not on the lists. As I
understand the rules, you get 0 points unless you can show that
L.Detweiler came up with some of the various contortions or squirms in
response to people asking him about S.Boxx or whatever. But it seems it
would obviously give you more points to go after more valuable
tentacles, like greg@ideath.goldenbear.com, and prove that E.Hughes is
actually posting through that site.

BTW, I think I already have over a thousand points if I played SQUISH.
The question is, will anyone beat me into submitting before the deadline?

what a delightful contest. Glad that everyone is enjoying it, even Medusa.
Darling cyberanarchists out there, I am delighted to foward this
announcement that all of CA bills and legislative data are now
available for perusal based on the passage of a revolutionary bill for
Cyberdemocracy, AB1624. You will obviously want to stay away from this
FTP site at all costs, because to visit it would indicate that you are
actually interested in this nation's government, democracy, and may
even want to participate in the system you live in, all antithetical to
the goals of `cyberanarchy', as you have yelled into my and others'
ears with excruciating noise and frequency.


It is interesting, thank you. I really drool over anything by the Big Macs.

I will answer your questions. YES. The postmaster and the mail office
and AT&T are RESPONSIBLE for PROVIDING ALL INFORMATION THAT EXISTS when
some illegal communication has been detected. That is, if someone has
been sending violent death threats, these communications services are
RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION. Sometimes no such information
exists because of the *inherent infrastructure*. E.g. with mail, it is
possible to send an anonymous letter. E.g. with phones, it is possible
to make anonymous telephone calls.

Instances of my claims are common. The post office may be contacted by
law enforcement officials attempting to track the origination of mail.
The telephone company may be subpoenaed to provide information on calls.

You completely neglect the subject of *design*. Whoever *designs* these
systems *chooses* whether traceability is inherent to the design. And a
sense of morality and ethics is central to this decision. A
communication system is not simply something that Exists and must be
Tolerated. A system is something that is *designed* to meet *criteria*.
And sometimes the criteria is, how do we prevent *illegal* uses?

Mr. Remailer Operator, YOU CHOOSE. are there ILLEGAL USES OF THE
REMAILERS, like HARASSMENT, BOXXIAN DEATH THREATS, LIBEL? or are there
NONE? Tell me what world I live in. It is so confusing for me when you
take contradictory positions.

Cypherpunks, a year ago, and for many months, you essentially said to
me: there is nothing illegal in ASCII text alone. But you have
screeched and shrieked at me and my postmaster and anyone who will
listen to you that anything *I* write is a violent death threat,
harassment, a libelous post that is ILLEGAL and that I should be CENSORED.

 one person told my postmaster that it was ok for me to post as long as
what I said was TRUE.  What if I say, cyberanarchists are slime? Is
that true? Is that Satire? Are the Cypherpunks the new Truth Police.
Oh, what ridiculously funny hypocrites you all are.

imagine that a certain string of letters is illegal! That it should
cause the author to be *censored*! *even* if he used a remailer! What a
shocking concept!

I am deliberately evading the question of whether libel, death threats,
etc. *exist*, that is, *illegal* postings. Our legal system certainly
seems to think so-- death threats are illegal in the postal mail.
Surprise! How many of you knew that? And recall that there are *limits*
on free speech-- you cannot advocate violence, or attempt to instigate
a riot legally, for example. Could someone be so kind as to post the law?

I think cyberspace will change some of these boundaries in a
significant way. But as long as You, Cypherpunks, say that Libel and
Death Threats and Illegal ASCII Text Exists and should be Banned, I
think I will believe you, because you do have some experiences in the
area, and you seem to have started to grasp the consequences of your
decisions, and even the idea that your *decisions* have *consequences*.
`succeed'? 

Hey Mr. Rotten Big Mac, call off your mad dog pit bull P.Metzger from
attacking the PostMan. Get a new leash for him. What do you feed him to
make him so vicious, anyway? And it *really* pisses me off that you
would send *tentaclegrams* from e.g. szabo@netcom.com to the PostMan to
get my account yanked. Imagine that! Nonexistent people attempting to
censor someone. The nobodies attempt to make me a nobody. The phantoms
attempt to kill me.

``What a strange place the net is becoming.'' -- Medusa

I've had this account for 4 1/2 years, and I have put out more than
half a dozen FAQs from here and answered thousands of inquiries about
them. Should I forward all future requests to *your* address when you
succeed in getting my account yanked? Would you like me to *retract*
all the FAQs I have ever written, because they indicate my address as a
contact point? Would you like to compose the form letter that explains
to everyone that L.Detweiler has been Censored in Cyberspace? Or maybe
you would like to take over the handling of the SQUISH contest too,
instead of forwarding all that crap to *me*.

Go to hell, Medusa.
