[tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations

[Joe Btfsplk]

On 6/15/2014 2:08 PM, Mirimir wrote:
> The law is the law, and (acting openly) the choices are compliance, or
> noncompliance on principle. But see above.
No, the law is often temporary, until someone has the guts to stand up 
(100's, maybe 1000's of times, in the last 150 yrs, in U.S. alone).
This & many countries were founded entirely on standing up against 
repression; by "revolutionists."
Hell, in the U.S., we celebrate & honor revolutionists - of the most 
extreme kind - every 4th of July.  Politicians give speeches all over 
the U.S., about how great the revolutionary militants were.

But then somehow, if in current day, people talk about changing the 
status quo - for really important issues, like civil rights, they're 
branded militants that need to be silenced by any means necessary.

"It was OK for the founding fathers to be extreme militants, but no one 
can do it after that, or they'll go to jail."

I'm not saying Tor Project (by themselves) should start a revolution 
over embargo laws.  But that scenario is similar to historical cases (in 
some respects).  Women couldn't vote; black people had to use different 
restrooms, water fountains.  I personally saw that growing up in the 
South.  On all those things & hundreds more, someone / some group had to 
stand up - & do more than send an email, that can be deleted by a 
flunkie, for anything to change.

> As long as funding doesn't come with strings, there's no problem with
> accepting it.
Very true - more so w/ people already using Tor or those that would 
never look at how Tor is funded.
But if some sayings were ever true, it's, "Perception is reality," and 
"You're judged by the company you keep."

People on the outside looking in, see an organization, whose primary 
purpose is to provide means to protect privacy, *especially* from gov't 
agencies, but the major portion of their funding comes FROM a gov't agency.

I'm sorry - but no matter how much I or anyone else loves Tor, to many 
"thinking" outsiders, it would appear quite fishy (if they know that 
funding fact).  "It just don't look right."
I think it's fishy - _& I like Tor_.  If I'd actually known that fact 
before I used it, I'd have thought something wasn't right.

It may be, if they really want to grow the Tor user base (continually), 
it may have to appeal to a broader audience, for many of whom the 
funding source issue may well be a stumbling block.