Geert K. Marien answered my questions on usefulness of anonymous posting, but I don't think too helpfully. Let me try briefly to respond: 1. He doesn't see how one could construct code to prevent anonymous postings. I won't argue that. I'm talking at the policy lvel. what people then do to evade conventions and constraints is a diferent issue. I'm suggesting that consensus is first necessary (if reachable) on the desirability of it. If it is concluded that it is not desirable, we go on to talk about how to prevent them. Clearly smart people can construct mail messages that are fictitious; we all \know about port 25. In the future authenticated mail may help here. 2. he says, >First, there are MANY uses for anonymous postings. Almost *ANY* discussion of a sensitive nature, with HIV being just one case, could rightfully be included. HIV is only one matter ... how about Sexual Abuse? What about anyone with a non-religious fundamentalist approved life style? Get the point? < Well, no, i don't. GKM is begging the question, which is precisely: why should anonymous postings be allowed in a group that is not specifically for anonymous postings? GKM goes on to use the analogy of AA; I find this a good analogy for the all-anonymous group (that we need, and an AA-like discussion is exactly the right case); but not for a general discussion in which there is no reason for people not to announce their views and, as in most public situations, be held accountable for them (in the sense of having them asnwered, be voted against, etc.; not in a legal sanction sense). ======== For the record: I'm talking at the moment in sociocultural terms, not in terms of "what we ought to do on the net". I think it is a valid concern that we will all eventually have to confront, but for the moment I'm trying to discuss this at the cultural level: the internet has provided us with a new means of communication which allows anonymous contributions to a discussion. To what extent does this change discourse? Do we want it to? Why or why not? Is the change "good"? --Peter Graham, Rutgers University Libraries