[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Privacy advocates resign over facial recognition plans
getting us back on track subject wise ... now that is a joke
i dont think being a fascist has anything to do with cypherpunks
the desire to ban someone is not the structure of this space FOR REASONS it
is open for structural reasons - philosophical reasons... ya know LOGIC
if the desire to ban people is inside you then you are engaging fascism
when some people will die for others freedom its totally repulsive that you
would even desire to ban someone from cypherpunks list
somewhere inside you shelley you know this ... please engage in self
critique - if i am so monstrous why read the words i write ? just disengage
- take responsibility and disengage
On Aug 14, 2015 9:38 AM, "Shelley" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On August 13, 2015 10:24:50 PM Peter Gutmann <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Shelley <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> >mode #cypherpunks +b ~q: [email protected]
>>
>> For procmail users, I've found that:
>>
>> :0
>> * ^From: *carimachet
>> /dev/null
>>
>> :0 B
>> * Cari Machet
>> /dev/null
>>
>> gets rid of most of it.
>>
>> Peter.
>>
>
> Yes, or I could add it to my sieve script. Honestly, I was just trying to
> get us back on track in a silly way. Someone asked that we get back to
> cypherpunk topics; I thought it was a mild & funny hint for her to do so.
>
> -S
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20150815/30959778/attachment.html>