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