re: havens, pools, usenet

[Karl Lui Barrus <klbarrus@owlnet.rice.edu>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> To wit, what happened to the idea of posting anonymously to
> newsgroups? This is how folks apparently communicated with BlackNet,

Nothing happened to the idea of posting anonymously to usenet!

It's just that it usually draws complaints from people, which at times
threaten the existence of the remailers involved.  And the fact that
the haven doesn't send mail out is an attempt to solve this problem.

Besides, the advantage the haven would offer is that it could allow
you to pay for more time - say by default messages get tossed out
after a day or two, but you could pay for yours to stay around a while
longer. 

Maybe commercial services operate differently, but here at Rice,
newsgroups (especially in the alt.* hierarchy) expire lightning fast.
Well, all except the rice.* and clari.* heirarchies.  Which would pose
a difficulty in using certain groups.

Like I said, most of the objections I see to anonymous mail are the
fact that mail actually arrives at another person mailbox or in a
newsgroup.  I mean, I was involved in a flame war on comp.admin.policy
a while ago, and after exchanging posts and email with a few people,
it became clear their only objection to anonymous posts/mail was that
mail actually went somewhere or it was a breach of "nettiquette".

Tim, I agree with your assessment of "nettiquette"; there are plenty
of worse abusers, but all the same, it draws fire which is harmful.
If nothing else, lots of other people get irritated.  For instance,
Serdar Argic seems to survive despite net.abuse, but it irritates
hundreds. 

Karl Barrus
klbarrus@owlnet.rice.edu

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a

iQCVAgUBLdWHFIOA7OpLWtYzAQHOiQP8CQF5Sdj/nf+YbDNuyWgNB8bFrZTW7f1q
3oPsfjdXiJsrmpkb53YeM1iPZr3THAJYX9M8wPOopZOvU9LDVRQhGXOUa7FuIAww
6+lk13ys/1RWFNLhycOmIErz+0+prwp1bBMbxQ7s4Ok5lecXjM8Qkaz356gUhJDc
lYHrQkcNN2c=
=krV1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----