Re: Enough's enough already

[dmandl@shearson.com (David Mandl)]

> From: John.Nieder@f33.n125.z1.fidonet.org (John Nieder)
> 
> Paul Ferguson writes:
> 
>  BK> I know that someone may declare my query as naive, but if you
>  BK> feel strongly enough about a topic, why wouldn't you want the
>  BK> recipient to know who you are, where you are and who they can respond
>  BK> to?
> 
> I just had a chilling example of why last month.  Someone who made my
> life a living hell (in real life, not cyberspace) "found" me again in a
> discussion in a tech newsgroup and sent me a "yoo-hoo!" e-note.  I could
> have gone a long time without that.  My identity was irrelevant to the
> discussion, but was unfortunately very relevant to making this nasty
> little surprise possible.
> 

Yup, there are dozens of reasons to want anonymity.  This should be completely
obvious to anyone moving in cypherpunk circles--or alt.sex circles, where,
amazingly, some well-respected sexosophists actually spoke out against anonymous
posting recently.  No offense intended, but anyone who can't think of situations
where anonymity is essential should get out more.  Any first grader can list
dozens of places where even mild blasphemy will get you locked up for a long
time. [Begin Zerowork tangent] And even if you think the U.S. isn't one of them
(which it is), keep in mind that most workplaces are effectively stalinist
dictatorships, and bosses may not be thrilled about having their employees
discuss crypto anarchy, the overthrow of governments, or S & M on the net.

   --Dave.