1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
|
Return-Path: <david.vorick@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F3CB409
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 22 Aug 2015 13:39:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ob0-f181.google.com (mail-ob0-f181.google.com
[209.85.214.181])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9B111E5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 22 Aug 2015 13:39:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by obkg7 with SMTP id g7so79370227obk.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 22 Aug 2015 06:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=DOLEc1ZV/6LrLleQxVyqMWc//IkZsONB1jBMKTlZdWI=;
b=l5IqhMGRwGkI4PQDCdmCUZv2rT6OhLKzi//BeqlfsUBJeaqObTNOAgD+uKtGpM4iBt
qgd8YoLnSgZD0hPPyOWJYKgmrqJO613V4HxfkfbcaGOBCsBze1oF8YmWSp3RkgAtIJik
13JtuwQljS9gW+V5Cq3e1whL98Nt0FLjjPOd/fst5ZGFKBITswse3kvbsd2Q++hs2q2M
W0gSppZlWeCTlyzDllU6mGFGcR5QW8mVI6X4YqObJPQO134d96lrkUTbRiE8Ia2ZU5RX
CmgfOQiVdtquyWG3vnak/eY7k3PHCWJrokTgiccDvWX/jB8FnBpJeInZgJ/6eZ3FDyRD
OYqw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.109.230 with SMTP id hv6mr12781871obb.22.1440250754005;
Sat, 22 Aug 2015 06:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.202.172.138 with HTTP; Sat, 22 Aug 2015 06:39:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150821130333.Horde.9zPFmy3VMqAO5FGReDHaRg1@www.vfemail.net>
References: <20150821130333.Horde.9zPFmy3VMqAO5FGReDHaRg1@www.vfemail.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 09:39:13 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFVRnypEF+bkpxkoQOdMzK9PdDAJ5GieOyUtY=0_72SBuGBPvQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Vorick <david.vorick@gmail.com>
To: sisadm101@clovermail.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c31b4e948192051de682e7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Censorship
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 13:39:15 -0000
--001a11c31b4e948192051de682e7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I am not sure that this is on-topic for the bitcoin-dev mailing list, but
it seems politically relevant enough that I'm going to respond.
/r/bitcoin and bitcointalk.org are both discussion websites that pertain to
a specific topic. All (or nearly all) discussion websites pertaining to a
specific topic have a set of rules that get enforced to facilitate relevant
and interesting discussion. These rules help to block spam, and help to
make sure that discussions happen in their appropriate places. The rules in
place on the two primary bitcoin discussion sites have helped facilitate a
large userbase frequented by many relevant experts. I do believe that we
can thank the strict moderation policies for much of the activity that
happens which is technically interesting.
/r/bitcoin and bitcointalk.org are both centralized forums. As such, the
rules are going to be set by a centralized authority. The rules set have
been set to keep the discussion as interesting and relevant as possible.
When a certain theme becomes a massive echo chamber or little more than
beating a dead horse, it makes sense to implement moderation. Calling it
'censorship' is misleading, because a government authority is not
threatening punishment for the discussion of a certain topic. People are
not banned from visiting forums or websites where off-topic (or
against-the-rules) discussion is happening. People's /r/bitcoin rights are
not being revoked because they are subscribed to a controvertial subreddit.
That would be censorship.
Many people are clearly unhappy with the moderation happening on /r/bitcoin
and bitcointalk.org. Luckily, the switching cost for online discussion
forums is very low. I'm now going to invite people to post links to bitcoin
discussion forums where the moderation authority is different.
I know that a recently popular subreddit is /r/bitcoin_uncensored
I am interested to see what other forums people think are worth mentioning.
--001a11c31b4e948192051de682e7
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div>I am not sure that this is on-topic for the bitc=
oin-dev mailing list, but it seems politically relevant enough that I'm=
going to respond.<br><br></div><div>/r/bitcoin and <a href=3D"http://bitco=
intalk.org">bitcointalk.org</a> are both discussion websites that pertain t=
o a specific topic. All (or nearly all) discussion websites pertaining to a=
specific topic have a set of rules that get enforced to facilitate relevan=
t and interesting discussion. These rules help to block spam, and help to m=
ake sure that discussions happen in their appropriate places. The rules in =
place on the two primary bitcoin discussion sites have helped facilitate a =
large userbase frequented by many relevant experts. I do believe that we ca=
n thank the strict moderation policies for much of the activity that happen=
s which is technically interesting.<br><br></div><div>/r/bitcoin and <a hre=
f=3D"http://bitcointalk.org">bitcointalk.org</a> are both centralized forum=
s. As such, the rules are going to be set by a centralized authority. The r=
ules set have been set to keep the discussion as interesting and relevant a=
s possible. When a certain theme becomes a massive echo chamber or little m=
ore than beating a dead horse, it makes sense to implement moderation. Call=
ing it 'censorship' is misleading, because a government authority i=
s not threatening punishment for the discussion of a certain topic. People =
are not banned from visiting forums or websites where off-topic (or against=
-the-rules) discussion is happening. People's /r/bitcoin rights are not=
being revoked because they are subscribed to a controvertial subreddit. Th=
at would be censorship.<br><br></div><div>Many people are clearly unhappy w=
ith the moderation happening on /r/bitcoin and <a href=3D"http://bitcointal=
k.org">bitcointalk.org</a>. Luckily, the switching cost for online discussi=
on forums is very low. I'm now going to invite people to post links to =
bitcoin discussion forums where the moderation authority is different.<br><=
br></div><div>I know that a recently popular subreddit is /r/bitcoin_uncens=
ored<br><br></div><div>I am interested to see what other forums people thin=
k are worth mentioning.<br></div></div></div>
--001a11c31b4e948192051de682e7--
|
