Anonymity vs accountability - a balanced view (maybe?)

[deadbeat]

In-reply-to: Matthew Rapaport's message of Wed, 24 Feb 1993 08:20:43 -0800.
	     <9302241620.AA25561 at netcom2.netcom.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Matthew argues for balance in the USENET battle over pseudo/anonimity.
Matthew is preaching to the choir.

Folks who have watched USENET for any appreciable length of time know
that reason is not highly prized there.  Volume is.

The self-apponted gods of the net can't stop us, they can only bitch
about us.  Let them.

This is no different than any other USENET issue.  The only way to win
is not to play.

DEADBEAT

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.1

iQBFAgUBK4wpGPFZTpBW/B35AQFppwF/fACfJjSLzYDi7LNCRCndyZwxTIRbpuIp
G+G9pvcjA/dJQn6Z/AtDuyIe0guaihxS
=VpJU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help at anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin at anon.penet.fi.
*IMPORTANT server security update*, mail to update at anon.penet.fi for details.