Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!elroy!gryphon!mhnadel
From: mhnadel@gryphon.CTS.COM (Miriam Nadel)
Newsgroups: news.misc
Subject: Re: A serious dilemma for the net
Message-ID: <7143@gryphon.CTS.COM>
Date: 20 Sep 88 19:15:32 GMT
References: <7106@gryphon.CTS.COM> <29839@bbn.COM>
Reply-To: mhnadel@gryphon.CTS.COM (Miriam Nadel)
Followup-To: alt.flame
Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA
Lines: 55
In article <29839@bbn.COM> cosell@BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell) writes:
>In article <7106@gryphon.CTS.COM> mhnadel@gryphon.CTS.COM (Miriam Nadel) writes:
>}This problem might be solved if the management at the Portal System would
>}simply replace the "XPortal-User-Id:" line with the user's real name. This
>}situation would perhaps force a poster to use more discretion prior to
>}posting, knowing that his or her *real* name would be attached to the
>}posting.
>
> This is, at best, a bit difficult to arrange and certainly an untenable
> net.precedent. You may object to "Inquisitor" handles, but point of fact
> no one knows _anything_ about anybodys name around the net. I suppose one
> could argue that "net pseudonyms" are to be verboten, but I'm not sure how
> one would enforce that or what penalty might be invoked. There are the
> well-known ones (_hobbit comes to mind right away), plus the virtually
> useless ones ("From" field is "ajport@", with the signature just
> saying "aj" -- so who IS that?) -- will we get to (or have to) vote on
> whether a particular net identity is "acceptable"?
>
This is not terribly difficult to arrange - there is already a line on every
posting from Portal which says "XPortal-User-Id:" followed by a sequence of
numbers, which indicate which Portaloid has posted that particular piece of
drivel. (I admit to having seen a very rare posting from Portal which is
not complete drivel, but such postings have always had a real name attached
instead of a handle.)
Admittedly, we do not know if someone is using their real name. But, in the
case of business and university machines, one can track a users affiliation.
In addition, the username in the from field won't change, while the name
associated with it may, while one needs to waste time with a cryptic bunch of
numbers to determine that killer@cup.portal.com is the same dweeb as
wasser@cup.portal.com, for example. Other public access sites and private
sites do not permit one to avoid taking responsibility for one's postings in
the same manner. In addition, Portal's legendary Usenet interface apparently
permits one to post without knowing anything about Unix, editors, etc. making
it far more accessible to people who cannot be bothered to understand what
they're using than other public access sites.
Note that we have not taken the extreme step of requesting that Portal be
removed from the net. We are merely asking that their users be forced to
take responsibility for their actions. I am tired of users who have
excessively long signatures. I am tired of users who can't be bothered to
use e-mail instead of posting. I am tired of users who don't know how to
edit out 240 lines of previous responses before adding a one word reply or
nothing at all (except the 16 line signature, including how to reach them
by carrier pigeon.) Portal users are certainly not the only people to
abuse the net in this manner but, when there are a large number of users
at a given site who refuse to practice good netiquette, one can only hold
the site responsible. In addition, Portal users - and management - have
repeatedly violated the strictures on commercial use of the net.
Miriam Nadel
--
"I deny that I have ever given my opinion to anybody" - George Bush
mhnadel@gryphon.CTS.COM !gryphon!mhnadel