From extropians-request@extropy.org Sat Oct 16 00:21:05 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA24866; Sat, 16 Oct 93 00:21:03 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.ed (ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu) by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA22140; Sat, 16 Oct 93 00:20:16 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu id AA24909; Sat, 16 Oct 93 03:15:45 EDT Received: from news.panix.com by ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu via TCP with SMTP id AA24904; Sat, 16 Oct 93 03:15:30 EDT Received: by news.panix.com id AA14492 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for exi-maillist@ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu); Sat, 16 Oct 1993 03:15:18 -0400 Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1993 03:15:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199310160715.AA14492@news.panix.com> To: Extropians@extropy.org From: Extropians@extropy.org Subject: Extropians Digest X-Extropian-Date: October 16, 373 P.N.O. [07:14:53 UTC] Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: O Extropians Digest Sat, 16 Oct 93 Volume 93 : Issue 288 Today's Topics: [3 msgs] FWD: weirdnuz item (Judge [1 msgs] INSURANCE: experiences good/bad? [2 msgs] INSURANCE: experiences good/bad? [1 msgs] JMT: Channelor vs. Rant (fallacy of self-parody) [1 msgs] META: Failures of the List Justice System [2 msgs] META: Re: Plea Bargains [1 msgs] Meta: Judgment - Wiik vs May [1 msgs] Meta: Plea Bargins [1 msgs] Nightly Market Report [1 msgs] Sterner's "The Ego and Its Own" [1 msgs] Stirner: The Ego and His Own [1 msgs] THANKS [1 msgs] meta: I am back (your add/drop) [1 msgs] Administrivia: No admin msg. Approximate Size: 51440 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 15:38:09 -0700 From: dkrieger@Synopsys.COM (Dave Krieger) Subject: resend #93-10-391 resend #93-10-433 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 15:44:24 -0700 From: dkrieger@Synopsys.COM (Dave Krieger) Subject: THANKS Thanks to everybody who sent copies of the World's Shortest Political Quiz. dV/dt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 93 16:36:09 PDT From: martino@gomez.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Martin R. Olah) Subject: INSURANCE: experiences good/bad? This is posted publicly for anyone else (Tim May) who may soon be shopping for policies. --------------- I have a universal life policy with New York Life. I didn't know much about life insurance when I got it, and could have done better. My girlfriend and her daughter will be getting policies with Time, which is also well rated by Weiss* (sp?) and costs somewhat less. $50,000 universal life for a 29 year old non-smoking female costs ~$31 a month. This may be paid up within a few decades depending on interest rates. 7 year old female is ~$10 a month. Of course the smartest financial move is to invest money yourself and use that to pay for term insurance. I suggest shopping around and making a well informed decision, since it's so easy to give in to inertia once you've(I've) made a mediocre decision. When getting universal quotes, ask for the target premium so they don't give you a low quote which may(will) go up in the future. This will also help compare it to whole life policies. Unfortunately it's difficult to compare the wide variety of policies available in a concrete manner. Good luck. O Martin * Libraries often carry manuals from the rating agencies. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 16:48:50 -0700 From: dkrieger@Synopsys.COM (Dave Krieger) Subject: META: Re: Plea Bargains "While I agree with what you say, I am about to penalize you 700 quatloos for saying it." -- Voltaire, in some parallel universe >From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty) >Subject: Meta: Plea Bargins >X-Extropian-Date: Remailed on October 15, 373 P.N.O. [22:01:50 UTC] >X-Message-Number: #93-10-655 > >Additionally, I think that this practice of uninvolved third-parties >bringing charges is abusive and a massive time-waster for all involved. If >"Bo" wants to moan about what I post in response to him, he at least can >claim to have been the object of it; Mr. May cannot, and would seem to be >bringing his massive list of charges out of some misguided sense of >propriety he wishes to impose on others. The rationale for allowing anybody to bring charges is because the waste of bandwidth reduces the utility of the list for every individual member. I think Tim was trying to make the same point you are: he feels that the present system of list administration is broken, and his way of illustrating this, in his typical indirect fashion, is to "turn the handle the way it goes, only more so" (to quote Eric Frank Russell). I support Tim's goal of having a more equitable and evenly-applied control mechanism for flaming and other bandwidth-consuming processes. Back in 1991, when dinosaurs still roamed the earth and I was the list administrator, there was something of a consensus on how to deal with inappropriate list behavior: correct the offender in private e-mail, while in public, don't react at all -- instead let their egregious stupidities echo in deafening silence. This worked largely because the clueful outnumbered the clueless by a wide margin, and offenders usually ended up unable to sustain a conversation by themselves. >From the look of modern list traffic, the proportion of newbies is a lot higher nowadays (perhaps the old hands are mostly lurking instead of posting). With so much inappropriateness around (mostly in the form of endless attempts to argue the basics), it becomes very tempting to issue a broadside to the list in an attempt to correct all such offenders at once. (The cheer that goes up from the gallery when such a screed is posted is also less than successful as a deterrent. The many, many "attaboy" and "Wish I'd said that" messages that come in after putting some wrongthinker in his place are a heady and addictive drug. I regret to say that most of this encouragement that I received was also from old-timers.) Finally, with the addition of the "Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org" header to every post, it's easier to send to the list-as-a-whole than to the individual offender, which requires cutting and pasting their address or, worse, writing it down and typing it back in. It's much faster and easier to just hit the "R" key. Simply "::excluding" the clueless isn't emotionally satisfying because, if you're a backslider like me instead of a good neo-Calvinist like Tim, you can't bear the idea of surrendering the minds of those who're reading everything (might we call them the un::excluding middle?) to those no-good whim-worshipping libelers over there on the other side. "The truth must be defended!" In a sense the presence of a list administrator is a public good -- the idea gains currency that it's Harry's job, and not everybody's, to keep the list informative and noise-free. This is just like abdicating one's sovereignty to a government, instead of assuming the responsibility of good citizenship and self-government. The long-term solution to the problem is to have everyone -- well, not even everyone, just a sufficiently large minority -- make an effort to act in ways that incentivize the list membership properly. The way to do this is: When Joe Newbie posts something egregiously off-topic for the list or just fundamentally counter to the Extropian basics, send him private e-mail explaining the error (or cussing him out, if you prefer) and, in public, let his post decay from neglect -- don't react to it publicly in any way. Similarly, when Joe Crotchety Old-Timer lets loose with both barrels at Joe Newbie in a public post, send him private e-mail saying that, while you agree with what he said, it was really inappropriate for the list-as-a-whole and he should send it by private e-mail next time. By now attentive readers will be saying, "Yeah, Dave, good advice. We notice you've been putting this into practice yourself lately." Well, to quote "Bob", "I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to." I didn't sign up to be anybody's role model; consider me, if you prefer, as a horrible example. Your Uncle Victor is getting on in years and doesn't have quite the patience he once had. Rest assured dV/dt is taking his lumps for his brash behavior (no posts from 1900 PST today until 1900 PST Sunday). There's one problem with the incentive structure I've outlined: there's no meta-incentive for the incentivizers to implement the primary incentives, aside from the reward of having a more informative and less noisy list, which, unfortunately, is a public good, with no way to see to it that the reward goes only to those who cooperated instead of defecting. It's more *fun* to defect (that is, to flame, or to watch someone with whom you agree flame) than it is to waggle one's virtual finger and say "no-no", even though in the long run the latter is the more productive pastime. HEx doesn't appear to be a sufficiently rigorous reputation exchange yet to enforce the iteration of this Dilemma. From the discontent evidenced by Tim, Lefty, and a cast of thousands, the present list rules, despite HABS' best efforts, aren't providing a sufficient meta-incentive either. Well, as some physicist (Bohr?) is reputed to have said, "I don't have any solutions, but I certainly appreciate the problem." I'd like to issue an invitation to the game theorists in the house -- what's the next step? What feature of list software or culture needs to be implemented to meta-incentivize us all to do what needs to be done? dV/dt who now has "Fuck you" implemented as a macro in his mailer ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 93 16:53:21 PDT From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: META: Failures of the List Justice System Extropiates, Some comments on the List justice system and on why I filed the sheaf of charges recently. And what I think it showed. I consider the List justice system to be seriously flawed, as it has been for a long time. This is no fault of Harry's, as he has the relatively thankless job of applying this flawed justice system. We have debated this "PPL" justice system several times, that I know of, with more heat than light produced. The basic rules which failed half a year or so ago, are _still_ failing. Though the time for judgment has at least been reduced. To me the most serious flaws are: 1. A strictly mechanical application of formal rules about flames, insults, and such, with little room for "customary law" alterations. Many of us talk about the wonderfulness of "jury nullification," by which a jury of one's peers (loosely speaking) can nullify a bad law, that is, they can ignore the letter of the law and decide for themselves. However, our vaunted PPL system on this list has *no such provisions*! There is basically no provision for "common sense" verdicts or for the concept of "justifiable flamage." A rules-oriented judge, especially one who may have skipped many of the flames between individuals, may not feel he has any choice but to mechanically apply rules ("Do you deny that you called Mr. X a jerk? You don't? OK, I hereby ban you from posting for one 24-hour period."). A *jury*, on the other hand, might very well throw out the charges, essentially arguing that "Mr. X _needed_ flaming." (There is of course the bizarre pretense on the List that one must never, no matter what the insult or action, flame another, that all such incidents are to be handled by the formal charge policy. This fails for several reasons. First, it clogs the court. Second, it takes too much time to prepare a case for such trival matters. Third, all of the failures of the justice system make the whole process distasteful.) 2. In the real world, a prosecutor (DA, PA) would decide whether to proceed with charges, whether to drop them, etc., based on weighing the evidence, the chances of conviction, and the costs, etc. In civil cases, no such screening exists, which may be why the courts are clogged with such cases, and new civil cases may take half a dozen years to come to trial. (Bruce Benson, in "The Enterprise of Law," deals with these situations in detail, as well as the whole issue of customary law, what we often abbreviate as PPL, for privately-produced law.) In a PPL system, however, the costs of bringing a prosecution, and the chances of success, would be weighed by one's PPL protection/legal agencies. We do not have this in our current List justice system...just one of several ways our system is very far from a real PPL system. 3. A system in which thin-skinned individuals can bring charges that thicker-skinned individuals would just ignore. (I'll explain my rationale for suddenly bringing a series of suits later. I had never filed charges before, despite some rather serious insults thrown my way a while back, as some of you may recall, and I only filed this time to graphically and tangibly make some points.) This complaint system rewards "crybabies" and encourages others, who had previously been thick-skinned, to themselves files suits. Voila! The "court" gets choked with nuisance suits. 4. The costs of bringing suits are not being borne by those who bring the suits, encouraging frivolous or vengeance-oriented suits. (Again, we've debated this several times...with no conclusions reached.) And of course the verdicts (and some of the debate) show up on the List, increasing "noise" traffic to some. (However, I don't feel too badly about this, as a graphic demonstration of pseudo-PPL in action has to be as "Extropian" a topic as are the dozens of posts about trebuchets!) So, the justice system is flawed. So what else in new? Recently, I filed a sheaf of suits to "break" or at least "proof-test" the system. I acknowledge that these suits were in some sense "nuisance suits," though I will not formally admit this was the motive (as there's probably some clause deep in the laws banning this). If they were a nuisance, it was to make the point that we are deluding ourselves by thinking we have a true PPL system. We don't. I recently got angry at Mike Wiik and flamed him. Just one flame. (Not a series, as I'd seen in some other cases, involving "apodictic operationalism" and quantum computers, and the like.) I agree with the view that flames are not a good thing, and I should not have lost my temper. Mike Wiik's post just struck me as too much of a pot shot from someone who has not been contributing much to the list...and it smacked of his "gun-toting Nazis" charge levelled at me a while back. Oh well. So I got hit with a charge of flaming and, as Harry put it, "rules are rules." My suspension from the list ended a few hours ago, hence this post. I was struck by the fact that my own post said nothing in it that others had not been saying, such as "*plonk*," "you're an asshole," and so on. (In fact, I was careful to check what had been established as the bounds for "customarily acceptable behavior." I even quoted from their own posts.) So why was I charged? And found guilty? A thin-skinned person complained, and Harry just mechanically applied the rules, which allow no room for deviation. (Have you all seen "Demolition Man"? A very funny and memetically useful film, as it satirizes political correctness in all the right ways. I give it a very high Extropian rating. Borrowing from it, we could automatically grep through each posting and issue "tickets" for forbidden words, harsh language, etc. All of our AI, neural net, and linguistics folks on the list could help with the natural language know-how needed to recognize "hurtful" comments. "Be well!") So I set out to make the situation clear, in the hopes of fixing the current system. (Frankly, I thought the ::exclude system _was_ the fix. As soon as I flamed Wiik, I put him in my ::exclude file so as not be tempted to flame him again in the future. BTW, Harry may've noticed this, and this may be why Harry issued the strange order that Wiik put _me_ in his ::exclude file, but no mention of the reverse. I agree with Lefty that ordering people to ::exclude others is a bad idea, and I hope Harry can reconsider this move. I'd also like to see ::excludes expire automatically--or not, if requested to be permanent, as an option--so that we can ::exclude someone who angers us, but only for a few weeks or so.) Upon deciding to "exercise" the system I checked with Harry to make sure the policy about who could file charges had not changed. He confirmed it had not, and in fact encouraged me to file charges in whatever cases I had in mind. Harry is free to post all of our correspondence over these matters, if he wishes. At least in his early messages to me about this plan, he applauded my plan...he may feel differently now, of course. (Insert smiley here if your wish.) Then I went back over the messages I'd kept and picked out cases where I thought a mechanical interpretation of the rules would result in "guilty" verdicts. I won't rehash them here, except to say that in almost none of the cases did I feel any animosity toward the folks I charged. As I wrote to Dave Krieger, "nothing personal." (Dave acknowledged this. I guess I'll find his true feelings if I get my "Firesign Theater" ticket!) In fact, in most of the cases I fully agreed with the flames, the *plonks*, and whatnot. Even Mike Price's "Dr. Death" fake-German accent ("zee penalty iss death") didn't bother me when it was actually directed at me...I just shrugged, maybe chuckled, and moved on. But from a strictly rule-based interpretation, it looked like he was in some sense painting me as a kind of Nazi, which is a kind of flame. According to rules, as Harry just confirmed in his 3-day suspension of Mike. (Which I feel bad about. Seems like a harsh sentence. In fact, to show I was not trying to get something for nothing, I will take the same amount of time off from posting that Mike Price takes. Probably starting when he does, or perhaps earlier. Not to sulk, but to show that I am in a kind of "solidarity" with him, or something fuzzy like that.) I think concrete experiments and demonstrations of problems are what this List is about. The cyberspace constructs we aim to build have to be tested and, when found wanting, improved. (The HEx system is also flawed, and is easily munged. Another topic, though.) My concrete suggestions are: 1. Drop the pretense that the List is a kind of customary law. It may not be run by the U.S. government, but it lacks many key ingredients of a real market-based legal system. 2. Drop the "filing charges" business. I haven't seen a case where it worked. It didn't get the Worley Perversion off the list, and it didn't get the Pandit Pseudonym off the list (has it?). (Worley left of his own accord, after months of openly baiting us, and the P.P. was kicked off by the ExI board for ExI trademark or copyright violations.) 3. Encourage ::excludes, possibly timed for 1-4 weeks (a cooling-off period). 4. Follow the Cypherpunks example and let the List operators (or ExI, or somesuch) step in and simply _table_ the debate. I recall this was done on the Pagan Trial matter in July, for one month. It was sorely needed recently during the interminable and flamish debates over operationalism, quantum computers, the origin of rights, etc. (Starr vs. Metzger, Price vs. Donald, etc.). (This is not "authoritarianism," this is the host of a party telling guests to take their personal squabbles elsewhere.) 5. An occasional loss of temper, resulting in a flame, is not such a big deal. In fact, it usually reflects more on the flamer than on anyone else. Repeated flames or obnxious behavior are better handled at a different level than encouraged flamees to individually file charges, IMHO. 6. If the "filing charges" system is retained, as I suspect it will be despite my comments, then I really think the "third parties can file" principle needs to be maintained. That is, Alice can file even though the flames were between Bob and Charles. (This is the current system, and the one I mainly used in my sheaf of suits.) Allowing only those "directly involved" to file results in some people knowing their target simply won't file charges (as I wouldn't, prior to this recent experiment). And the argument goes that flames hurt the entire list, not just flame targets. 7. Repeat filers of charges, the "thin-skinned," need to have some costs incurred. Or to be told not to file so many suits. (Would apply to me, except I've completed my experiment and doubt I'll file any charges anytime soon.) 8. A time limit on charges, of course. Two weeks seems about right. 9. A jury system, to relieve the load on Harry. How the jury would be picked, I have no idea. Conclusions: The list justice system is seriously broken. The flaws are shown every time we have a flare-up of suits. Better to just admit there is no mechanical set of rules, that "list justice" will be handled more common-sensically, more informally. Cheers, -Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 93 16:53:48 PDT From: GRAPS@galileo.arc.nasa.gov Subject: Stirner: The Ego and His Own Perry asks: >I know that someone once posted a copy of Sterner's (or is that >Stirner's?) "The Ego and Its Own" to the list. Does anyone have a copy >still or can someone tell me where to get one? I don't have the electronic version (it may be at home on a floppy somewhere, but I'm currently at work), but it's easy to get through the mail. I ordered my copy from Loompanics several years ago, and I'm fairly sure that they still carry it. (This is a classic! I'm very surprised that you haven't read it yet!) Amara Graps graps@gal.arc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 20:04:52 -0400 From: "Perry E. Metzger" Subject: INSURANCE: experiences good/bad? Martin R. Olah says: > This is posted publicly for anyone else (Tim May) who may soon be > shopping for policies. > I have a universal life policy with New York Life. I'd stick to term were I a young person with good investing sense. I pay ~$250 a year for $150,000 in term, and I invest the difference in cost. Perry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 93 17:16:24 -0700 From: davisd@auburn.ee.washington.edu Subject: Meta: Plea Bargins > Additionally, I think that this practice of uninvolved third-parties > bringing charges is abusive and a massive time-waster for all involved. If > "Bo" wants to moan about what I post in response to him, he at least can > claim to have been the object of it; Mr. May cannot, and would seem to be > bringing his massive list of charges out of some misguided sense of > propriety he wishes to impose on others. > > Lefty (lefty@apple.com) I agreed with most of what you said, but disagree with this. Two people may rant and rave but not bring charges against one another. I do not believe that Management created this list to provide a centralized remailer for general use. If people wish to flame, they may do so in private email. Third party charges are a distributed way of policing the list for tone and content, to keep the list functioning according to the guidlines set out by Management. Buy Buy -- Dan Davis ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 93 17:41:45 -0700 From: davisd@auburn.ee.washington.edu Subject: Sterner's "The Ego and Its Own" > I know that someone once posted a copy of Sterner's (or is that > Stirner's?) "The Ego and Its Own" to the list. Does anyone have a copy > still or can someone tell me where to get one? > > Perry Stirner's book is available by anonymous ftp from red.css.itd.umich.edu in /pub/Politics/Non.Serviam/Stirner. README.Stirner says ********************************************************* The files in this area comprise a complete book by Stirner on his philosophy of egoism. The files are an English-language translation from German. der.einzige.sea.hqx is an MS-Word for Macintosh version. der.einzige.ascii is an ASCII text version. If you have questions about the text, or wish to receive further information about the Non Serviam project, contact solan@math.uio.no in Norway. Paul Southworth Archivist pauls@umich.edu ******************************************************** The book is also still in print and can be ordered. Buy Buy -- Dan Davis ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 21:51:30 -0400 From: habs@panix.com (Harry S. Hawk) Subject: Meta: Judgment - Wiik vs May >> Mike Wiik has accused Tim May of flaming in the following post, >> >> X-Message-Number: #93-10-417 >> >> I found it hard to make a judgment against someone who I consider to >> be one of the best member's of the list. In discussing this with my >> peers, one mentioned Tim shouldn't be punished but give a medal. > >Harry, might I strongly suggest that in the future you recuse yourself >from any case in which you feel this difficulty, and appoint a judge >without such conflicts of interest? It wasn't that "difficult". I have excused myself from at least one case in the past when i felt there was a conflict. I feel there is a great difference between "difficultly" and conflict of interest. The difficultly stems that if I was to judge based upon the worth to the community of each party to the suit, the suit would have been thrown out. However, under our legal system, their is equal treatmet under the law - since that is the case i had to judge without considering Tim's worth to our community. -- Harry S. Hawk ON Vacation ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 22:07:56 -0400 From: habs@panix.com (Harry S. Hawk) Subject: meta: I am back (your add/drop) I am offically back home and working. All requests to add or drop from the list will be honored in the next 24 hours... -- Harry S. Hawk - Extropian habs@extropy.org In Service to Extropians since 1991 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 22:08:03 -0400 From: habs@panix.com (Harry S. Hawk) Subject: Meta: Statue of Limits All filling of charges must now be made within 2 weeks of the post. The date of the post will be taken from the time of the Extropian date header on any post in question. Your filling must reach the list admin. prior to the statue limits. Disagreements over this will be handled by the adjudicator. This new "law" shall take effect on Monday 12:01 AM, so that those currently planning to file charges have time to do so. The ExI board is at some point likely to vote on this issue. Their decision on this matter would become the "law of the PPL." If you feel my limits are to short, I suggest you directly lobby the board or discuss it on the list. /hawk -- Harry S. Hawk - Extropian habs@extropy.org In Service to Extropians since 1991 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 22:08:00 -0400 From: habs@panix.com (Harry S. Hawk) Subject: Meta: Picking your own judge 1) Despite the rash of legal action during my vacation, I hope the level of legal action will go down rapidly. 2) In the event you are party to a suit, you and the other party(ies) have the right to agree to your own judge. (There will be more rules about this soon.) 3) using our list technology, both parties can give the password to their list account to the judge so that control of the accounts can reside with a third party judge, so following a verdict one or more parties cannot defect. -- Harry S. Hawk - Extropian habs@extropy.org In Service to Extropians since 1991 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 93 19:08:54 PDT From: martino@gomez.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Martin R. Olah) Subject: INSURANCE: experiences good/bad? Perry: >I'd stick to term were I a young person with good investing sense. I >pay ~$250 a year for $150,000 in term, and I invest the difference in >cost. Did you get a policy with a guaranteed renewal? I worry about becoming uninsurable do to illness, particularly in a few decades. I understand that you can get these policies, but it will of course cost more. I'm also concerned that someday I may have all of my money tied up in a house, rather than good investments. With California housing prices I may never get there, but hey, it could happen. Otherwise I'm all for switching over to term. I've already given away too much of my premium. All advice appreciated.(I know, Duncan, don't buy a house, right? For now I HAVE to take that advice.) O Martin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 93 19:17:02 PDT From: nobody@alumni.cco.caltech.edu Subject: JMT: Channelor vs. Rant (fallacy of self-parody) I hereby charge Irn Rant with violation of the list rules, to whit, that she did with due intent and knowledge aforethought invade my body and use it and my computer terminal to send inflammatory and egregious nonsense out into the peace of our list. This has resulted in severe reputational damage and psychological trauma (public apologies) for me. Not to mention the fact that she isn't even a subscriber of the list. She also tampered with my brain, causing me to forget the possibility of bringing charges against her until after the statute of limitations had rendered the point moot. (For those of you who thought that Harry had made a typo, I regret to inform you that he was being accurate. In the interest of truth in advertising, the Clinton administration has renamed the Statue of Liberty the Statue of Limitations. 'Bring me your poor, your tired, your (etc.) yearning to breathe free, and I will make certain that they get universal health care and that no capitalist exploiters help^H^H^Hurting them.') In the interest of reducing Harry's suddenly tight agenda (especially while ON vacation), I have contracted with myself as the PPL adjudicator. I hereby judge Irn Rant to be guilty of the above charges and also of employing the fallacy of self-parody. She is hereby excluded from my body and from posting for 3 24 hour periods. John Channelor ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 22:32:39 -0400 From: habs@panix.com (Harry S. Hawk) Subject: META: Failures of the List Justice System 1) I thank Tim for such a thoughtful post 2) I thank Tim for testing the system which is for me what this list is all about. Testing our beliefs, ideals, and theories. 3) I also thank Dave K. for his posts on this vein. 4) I have learned as I have judged and by using the Perry Doctrine and Plea Bargins I have reduced the case load of 12 charges to less than the amount of labor I used to put into one. 4a) Thus I disagree with Tim about justice being clogged. The rules maybe flawed but they system works fine. 5) I have put in a staute of limits. 6) I feel the jury idea needs to be debated. The problem with such an thing is that any verdict will draw "light" from those who oppose it and on this list that can be tough. The Jury perhaps should be anonymous. 7) If Mike feels that the ::exclude is to harsh he should appeal. I will be checking to see if he has done this. If he has not he risks further penalties. 8) I think we should move to a fee based legal system. It should cost to file charges AND those who are guilty should be given a choice of a cash fine and/or a penalty. If the verdict upholds the view of that list member who made the suit, that list member should get part or all of their money back. 8a) Under the Perry Doctrine justice is quick and non-technical - under the Hawk Doctrine is all of that and cheap, but NOT free. -- Harry S. Hawk - Extropian habs@extropy.org In Service to Extropians since 1991 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1993 23:16:03 -0400 From: Duncan Frissell Subject: FWD: weirdnuz item (Judge C.>Numerous citations were written, but almost as fast as C.>the citations came to court, the court clerk--following C.>official procedures--voided them because they lacked C.>home addresses for the accused. [Sacramento Bee, 7-30- C.>93] Homelessness, represents a real privacy opportunity because it helps you explain refusal to provide an address. "I'm homeless." I thought that if they reupped conscription the "homeless defense" might be used to avoid legal hassles. Note that the AHSA'93 (American Health Security Act of 1993) is yet another residence-based control regime. Those without fixed abode can dodge some of the control measures. Duncan Frissell --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Oct 93 00:10:02 EDT From: The Hawthorne Exchange Subject: Nightly Market Report The Hawthorne Exchange - HEx Nightly Market Report For more information on HEx, send email to HEx@sea.east.sun.com with the Subject info. News Summary as of: Sat Oct 16 00:10:02 EDT 1993 Newly Registered Reputations: (None) New Share Issues: (None) Share Splits: (None) Market Summary as of: Sat Oct 16 00:00:02 EDT 1993 Reputations of members of the Extropians mailing list: [ Note: Contact hex-request to have a reputation placed on this list. ] Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding AMARA .10 .50 - 10000 - ANTON .61 .63 .63 10000 1943 ARKU .30 .31 .30 10000 5301 BLAIR .01 1.20 .01 10000 26 BROOX .01 1.00 - 10000 - DEREK .06 .19 .19 100000 18430 DROSE - .15 - 10000 - DRS - .15 .15 10000 2600 DVDT .75 1.75 1.70 10000 10000 E .80 1.00 .90 10000 8011 ESR - - - - - FCP .06 1.30 1.50 80000 15345 GHG .02 .30 .20 10000 8180 GODII .01 1.00 - 10000 - GOEBEL .01 .25 1.00 10000 767 H .40 .76 .76 30000 10290 HAM .60 .90 .90 20000 15918 HANNO .15 .24 - 10000 500 HFINN 1.50 6.00 .01 10000 1005 IMMFR .25 .70 .80 10000 1838 JFREE .02 .50 .50 10000 3200 JOHN .30 .40 .35 10000 600 JPP .26 .29 .26 10000 3500 KARL .50 1.50 2.00 10000 1000 KNNTA .12 .19 .26 100000 9900 LEFTY .30 .40 .40 10000 4751 MARCR - - - - - MLINK - .01 .01 1000000 102602 MWM - 1.50 .01 10000 1260 N 5.00 9.00 9.00 10000 4750 P 22.50 25.00 1.50 1000000 94 PETER - .01 1.00 10000000 600 PRICE - .01 .01 10000000 1410 R .40 .80 .70 10000 6100 RJC .65 2.00 1.00 10000 5200 ROMA - - - - - RWHIT - - - - - SAMEER .30 .75 .61 10000 9810 SHAWN .55 .55 .01 10000 25 TIM .10 .60 .50 10000 2104 WILKEN 1.00 10.00 1.00 10000 102 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other reputations: Total Shares Symbol Bid Ask Last Issued Outstanding 1000 .05 .40 .20 10000 5000 110 .01 .10 .10 10000 1750 150 .01 .10 .10 10000 1750 1E6 .20 - .20 10000 8825 1E9 .01 .09 .20 10000 7000 200 .02 .20 .10 10000 5075 80 .01 - - 10000 - 90 .01 - .10 10000 2000 ACS .10 .15 .12 10000 3223 AI .01 .09 .10 10000 2000 ALCOR - .25 .20 10000 3675.00 ALTINST - .25 .05 10000 4000 ANARCHY .20 .90 1.00 10000 1100 BIOPR .01 .09 .05 10000 3000 BITD .01 1.00 - 10000 - BLACK - .10 .10 100000 6000 CHUCK - - - - - CYPHP .20 .40 .30 10000 10000 D&M - - - 10000 - DC1000 - .10 - 10000 - DC200 - .15 .10 10000 1500 DC7000 - .10 - 10000 - DCFLOP .15 - .15 10000 6000 DRXLR .75 .90 .80 10000 4545 EXI .11 .25 1.54 10000 3025 FAB - - - - - GOD - .10 .10 10000 3000 GUNS - .90 1.00 10000 3900 HART - 1.99 2.00 10000 9000 HEINLN .28 .30 .30 10000 6600 HEX 100.00 101.00 100.01 10000 4158 KLAUS - .45 .45 100000 36004 KPJ - - - - - LEARY .01 .50 .20 10000 1000 LEF .10 .35 .10 10000 5214 LIST .40 10.00 .75 10000 5000 LP .25 .30 .50 10000 5625 LSOFT .50 1.00 .50 10000 9550 LURKR - .01 - 100000 - MED21 .01 .30 .30 10000 5399 MMORE - 1.25 .10 10000 3000 MNSKY - 1.80 - 10000 - MORE .38 1.25 .75 10000 2660 NEWTON - .50 .20 10000 1000 NLAW - .50 - 10000 - NNLAW - .50 - 10000 - NSS .02 .03 .01 10000 25 OCEAN .15 .18 .20 10000 6600 OOMPH - 20.00 22.00 20000 - PENNY - .08 1.50 10000 2500 PGP - 1.00 1.00 100000 2100 PLANET .01 .02 .02 10000 4000 PPL .30 .45 .30 10000 4600 RAND .18 .20 .20 10000 3900 RAW - .05 - 10000 - SSI .15 .20 .20 10000 5200 TCMAY .38 .40 .38 10000 6200 TRANS .01 .90 .60 10000 3211 VINGE .01 1.00 .75 10000 3449 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 #288 *********************************