"Jim Riverman" writes about the possibilities of abuse by pseudospoofing. I agree with him that this is an area of great potential concern. While I am not opposed to the principle of maintaining multiple identities on the net, the rule of netiquette should be that "multiple identities should _NEVER_ intersect." So I support "L. Detweiler"s right to be "Jim," but they ought never to support each other. His scenario is chillingly _possible_. At the same time, I think such episodes will be rare. The amount of effort needed to maintain multiple intersecting identities is quite high, and in most cases would be "uneconomic." However, in some cases, for some people, the effort might be worth it, so some thought ought to be placed into ways to detect or discourage it. Which brings up the question: how can we, in the era of digital pseudonyms determine that two pseudos are, or are not, the same person? One possible method would be careful automated analysis of the language used by the participants in a net discussion. As I recall, there are studies that show that people have deep patterns in their writing that can be detected even when they are trying to hide them. Literary finger- prints, if you will. This may be an area that "Jim" ought to research. Such an automated monitor might be a positive contribution.