[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Voluntary Disclosure of True Names
On Or About: 4 Sep 96 at 21:48, Timothy C. May wrote:
> In a rare moment of lucidity Vladimir Z. Dettweiler wrote:
> >I think cpunks should hold the view that communication is a matter
> >of mutual consent between sender and receiver. if a receiver says,
> >"I don't want any anonymous messages", then should be able to block them.
> But this is precisely what nearly all of us have been arguing. Namely, that
> the issue of anonymity vs. providing of True Names, is a matter of
> _contract_ between parties, not something the government is justified in
> sticking its nose into.
I always use my true name and am happy to spread it far and wide, but
I have been doing some work for a GroupWare manufacturer. They have
seen that even in a corporate environment where information sharing is
practised and embraced, sometimes people want to make a comment and
not take the heat for making that comment. This can provide some
constructive input, so they have a anonymous comment feature built
in. So you could say that it is absolutely necessary for the web
to have that feature as well.
> of some third party in providing ultimate traceability. I'm not wild about
> the U.S. Government being this third party
NO WAY, These guys are in my life enough already, and you can't trust
King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services