Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!wugate!uunet!motcid!meadley
From: meadley@cell.mot.COM (A. Meadley)
Newsgroups: news.newusers.questions
Subject: Re: The Ease of Forgery
Message-ID: <313@zircon.UUCP>
Date: 25 Oct 89 20:21:25 GMT
References: <2724@excal> <290@zircon.UUCP> <306@grape1.UUCP>
Organization: Motorola Inc. - Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Heights, IL 60004
Lines: 28

In article <306@grape1.UUCP> peed@cell.mot.COM (Andrew Peed) writes:
+In article <290@zircon.UUCP>, meadley@cell.mot.COM (A. Meadley) writes:
+> In article <2724@excal> kitty@excal.UUCP (Katherine Pryde) writes:
+> >Will you guys *please* stop all this about forging articles?
+> I expect that if someone was to post a "definitive" article on how
+> to forge an article, then this would all be cleared up once and for
+> all (or at least until someone else comes along and asks the same
+> question - but then again, this *IS* news.newusers.questions !)
+> 
+> So ... is someone out there going to post such an article ?
+
+	And THEN we'll see a whole bunch of usenet neophytes rushing right
+out to try this really neato thing that they read about forging articles.
+Some of them will be "I wanted to see if this really works." The great majority
+will NOT. I've seen people forge articles for the sole purpose of convincing
+the entire net that someone they don't like is a real jerk.


Unless I misunderstand the situation, we already do "see a whole bunch of usenet
neophytes [your words] rushing right out ....".  I thought that *that* was at
least half of the problem.

And what exactly do "the great majority" end up doing ?  I'm sure that there
are not that many people of evil intent on the UseNet (or am I being naive?).


Ant in Chicago
uunet!motcid!meadley