From: IN%"joseph@genome.wi.mit.edu" 13-FEB-1996 02:57:56.92

I agree with allen, about the issues of 'nym. But looking at other aspects of these cyberangels I'm unsure how to feel. On one hand they seem resonable, protecting only the children. "Acts bewteen consenting adults are okay" say they. But the protect the children was what the CDA hid under.

The 'CyberAngels' are rather like the CDA in that they keep using child pornography as a red herring to avoid talking about everything else they want to do. I will not be surprised if they wind up being informants for the CDA. The following CuDigest issues may shed some light on the issue. Both I and tallpaul have done some responding to them, incidentally. (In all of these, http://www.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/ should be put in front of the web addresses.): Vol 7, Issue 86: CUDS7/cud786 Vol 7, Issue 87: CUDS7/cud787 Vol 7, Issue 91: CUDS7/cud791 Vol 7, Issue 93: CUDS7/cud793 (I will note that the relevant article contains an inaccuracy on bestiality, claiming that it is illegal in all states. This is not the case, as some later CuDigests explain.) Vol 7, Issue 94: CUDS7/cud794 Vol 8, Issue 4: CUDS7/cud804 Vol 8, Issue 6: CUDS8/cud806 (I would appreciate some responses explaining the difference between an anonymous remailer and methods for mailbombing using forgeries - "Gabriel" does not seem to understand this. Vol 8, Issue 13: CUDS8/cud813 -Allen