At 2:58 AM -0700 8/4/00, rex wrote: > >I don't understand the concern. Anyone can pose as anyone >in cyberspace. If I wanted to, I could have posted as >"Mary Siegel <[log in to unmask]>." Compared to this >possibility, someone leaving off the name and simply using >a correct email address seems rather innocuous. Even if >the name is included there is no guarantee that there is >such a person in meatspace. That is true, but if we ever catch someone doing that, we throw them off the list ASAP. >What I care about is content, not the "name" associated >with the address. I welcome posts from pseudonyms posted >through anonymous remailers. Anyone with the ability to >establish a pseudonym via a remailer chain is likely to >have something interesting to say. In contrast, the fact >that Dumb N. Dumber uses his meatspace name to post >doesn't interest me at all. I would disagree with that. The ability to establish a pseudonym has little to do with the ability to have something interesting to say. I would wound why they had something to hide. >We don't (yet) have cops at every mailbox checking ID >before a letter can be mailed. Why should cyberspace be >any different? True, we don't have cops, although in this case, the list owner is acting somewhat in that capacity. The feeling is that people on a list have a right to know with whom they are speaking. The dog community is pretty close-knit and people who hide behind pseudonyms are generally gossips. We don't want them around. In any event, this is our desire. If you can help with the problem, I would love to hear your solutions. If you cannot, then I really do not see that telling me "it is immaterial" serves any purpose at all. Mary Siegel Setters-L