Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dartvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!dartvax!markv
From: markv@dartvax.UUCP (Mark F. Vita)
Newsgroups: net.music,net.rumor
Subject: Re: Attention, Responsible Net Users!  (And K-Mart Shoppers!)
Message-ID: <3347@dartvax.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 13-Jul-85 16:17:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.3347
Posted: Sat Jul 13 16:17:50 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 04:14:55 EDT
References: <4669@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Distribution: net.music,net.rumor
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Lines: 82
Xref: watmath net.music:8287 net.rumor:996

> ["Let me see: four times five is twelve, and four times six is thirteen,
>   and four times seven is -- oh dear!  I shall never go to twenty at
>   that rate!"]
> 
> > From: Judd Rogers 
> 
> > Since no-one else seems to see these aleged forgeries why don't you ignore
> > them?
> 
> > In anycase, don't tell us at net.rumor since it is not a rumor (a
> > halucination but not a rumor)
> 
> It's kind of interesting that you should say that when the posting that
> you are responding to is indeed a forgery!
> 
> Mit-Eddie doesn't receive these forgeries, so I may not have seen them
> all.  I received the following posting via personal mail from my bestest
> friend in the whole universe.  I did not post this -- it is the second
> forgery that I know of:
> 
> > From nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP
> 
> > I hope none of you seriously believe that I would entertain such
> > frivolous discussions on the merit of J.S. Bach's music.  I have
> > admired many of JSB's works, and although you all know how I feel about
> > Kate Bush's music, even to talk of such a comparison is obscene.
> 
> Clearly I don't really believe that such a comparison is obscene, for no
> forger would flame as long as I have on the subject.
> 
> > Once again, it looks like this is the work of the fun-people
> > eunuch-wizards.  It was slightly amusing the first time they forged
> > news article by me but I am beginning to get annoyed.
> 
> Yup!
> 
> > I have attempted to contact David Dobkin, the site
> > administrator-administrator at Princeton, in order to straighten
> > things out.
> 
> I have no idea who David Dobkin is.
> 
> > Is there anyone out there that is as upset as I am?  If
> > this keeps up the net will be in peril of losing its credibility.
> 
> Did it ever have any?
> 
> In the future, people might want to use this algorithm to determine if a
> message is really from me: If you say to yourself "My goodness that was
> a wonderful posting.  Doug Alan must be a real genius!" then assume it
> is really from me.  If you say to yourself "My God what a stupid
> article!  Doug Alan is a real asshole!" then assume it is a forgery.
> This may not give you an accurate picture of the truth, but I don't
> mind....
> 
> 				What does 'I' mean?
> 
> 				Doug Alan
> 				 nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)


   All right.  I give up.  What assurance do we netters have that this
last message is not also a forgery?  Will the real Doug Alan please
stand up?
   A more critical issue is:  how is it possible for someone to post
a forged message?  This would seem to be a MAJOR, serious problem
with the posting software, if it indeed allows this to happen.  
Anybody could go around posting malicious articles and putting other
people's names on them.  Maybe a report to net.unix-wizards or some
such is in order?
   I just hope this isn't some sort of extremely bizzarre joke
being played out by Mr. Alan...


-- 

                                Mark Vita
                                Dartmouth College

                       USENET:  {decvax,cornell,linus,astrovax}!dartvax!markv
                       ARPA:    markv%dartmouth@csnet-relay
                       CSNET:   markv@dartmouth