Author: Paul Richards
Date: 10:10:58 06/07/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 1999 at 11:36:42, Will Singleton wrote: >On June 07, 1999 at 10:51:06, Shep wrote: > >> >>I'm not so much into people hiding their identity either, but >>I don't see so many cases of abuse on CCC that this kind of action seems >>necessary, especially considering the work involved. >> > >Shep, > >I appreciate your comments, and your participation here. Checking IDs and >restricting free emails would require some work on the part of ICD, maybe quite >a lot. But consider the work that the moderators have to do to deal with the >existing problem. > >You don't see most of the junk we have to dump. The people who cause problems >here do so repeatedly, and make the moderators job very difficult. We can't >tell the legitimate posters from the garbage men. It leads to a kind of siege >state, the moderators trying to hold back the looney fringe. And good people >leave, since they are subject to attack, and the board becomes littered with >inconsequence. Which is why worrying about anonymous posting without worrying about anonymous reading makes no sense. You want to keep the jackoffs out at the gate, not let them in and then clean up their poop before anyone sees it. :) Practically it's very difficult. Apart from the vast numbers of free email domains, my experience on usenet is that the #1 haven for trolls is your home turf, AOL. Unlike most free email setups which tend to add traceable header information, AOL gives no clues whatsoever. Look at your address, "smocfi@aol.com". If you look on usenet the author name is SMO CFI. Should I send you to the dictionary to look up the word anonymous? ;) Now it happens that people here already know you, but that won't be true for everyone. AOL also allows you, what, ten screen names per account? Please. Not only that but I can get the one-month-free disks anywhere, sign on to AOL and wreak all sorts of havoc, then trade to another account a month later. I see it all the time. My gut feeling is to get frustrated and wish that AOL was banned from the net. But then all the normal AOL people would suffer. So why doesn't AOL force people to put their real names? It would be nice to reduce abuse coming from AOL. I suspect it's the same reason why we don't require all ISPs to attach the user's SSN to every piece of online communication. Because proving your identity isn't worth giving the whole world your personal information, because it can and will be abused. Funny that Europe has greater safeguards for online privacy, but it is Mr. Faber from Germany suggesting that we stamp everyone with an ID. ;) Imagine the fun Rolf could have with his endless fascist prattle. ;) Perhaps there is a way to automate some of the moderation to make it less of a burden.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.