Re: the Joy of Pseudospoofing Satan

[Panzer Boy <panzer@drown.slip.andrew.cmu.edu>]

On Mon, 25 Oct 1993, L. Detweiler wrote:
> The very final possibility of pseudospoofing I would like to describe ,
> perhaps the most treacherous and evil, is the following. Suppose Medusa
> not only had no ethics and morality, but was actually Satan in
> disguise. Suppose that she liked to torment and `punish' people with
> her `tentacles' whenever they `misbehaved', measured by their
> resistance to her oppression.

(L Detweiler != S Boxx) Based on articulation capabilities
(L Detweiler == Satan) ???
I had to give up here.  But when "digital signatures", "rape", and "Satan"
can all come up in a single thread, things have gotten out of hand.

Ok, after finally reading most of LD's post, I've come to the conclusion
that LD doesn't like the fact that people lie.  He doesn't like the fact
that people mis-represent themselves, etc.

I do ask you L Detweiler, what you consider of this case.  In "real-life"
awhile back there was a womem who was an actor.  She didn't like the fact
that she needed an agent to get work.  So she invented a personality, an
became her own agent.  She aquired a different personality, different
voice patterns, etc, for this agent.  She made sure the agent did
everything over the phone, never meeting clients in person.  Soon after
doing this, she started being an agent for other actors also.  She
obviously spoke well of her actorself when she was in her agentself, and
she obviously kept two personalities.  Is this wrong?  Should this women
not have done this?

 -Matt                              | Please get my public key if you wish
 (panzer@drown.slip.andrew.cmu.edu) | to verify that this message is mine.

"That which can never be enforced should not be prohibited."