>My items to this list on the matter the past few days have been in the
>nature of groping for good ways to restrict, at least partially, the
>information a forger needs to work with, while still keeping the list open
>for the free discussion it has always enjoyed.  I realise I'm trying to
>reconcile features that aren't going to mesh properly, but I can't help
>but ask about various list functions if I am not sure how they relate to
>one another, exactly what a particular keyword defines, etc.
>
>So I'm frequently a pest and no doubt often appear a fool.  I couldn't
>care less what you think of me.  All I care about is stimulating response
>that will give me advice, ideas, anything at all that will help me try to
>keep what has been a very fine list for many years the list our
>subscribers expect it to be.
>
>Douglas
>        Douglas Winship    Austin, Texas    [log in to unmask]
>                    Secondary AUTOCAT Listowner
 
 
hear, hear!!  I, for one, don't see what the big deal is with
making this information non-public.  Much of the internet makes
a lot of information about many people available--some of which
I don't think SHOULD be available, at least not that easily.
For example, any person can use gopher to look up the name,
phone number, home address, etc. of almost any student at Brown.
I didn't like that and so I removed some of my information.
My point is that I don't believe there's anything wrong with
a desire for more privacy in order to prevent information
from being misused.
Nate