Xref: utzoo alt.privacy:246 comp.org.eff.talk:1967
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!smith
From: smith@NCoast.ORG (Phil Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Telephone Caller ID's
Message-ID: <1991Apr6.014725.689@NCoast.ORG>
Date: 6 Apr 91 01:47:25 GMT
References: <1991Mar29.154847.16915@engin.umich.edu> <1991Apr1.035451.25308@netcom.COM> <27F6FC7F.3E44@ibma0.cs.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: smith@ncoast.ORG (Phil Smith)
Distribution: usa
Organization: North Coast Public Access Un*x (ncoast)
Lines: 15

As quoted from <27F6FC7F.3E44@ibma0.cs.uiuc.edu> by epstein@sunc4.cs.uiuc.edu (Milt Epstein):
| 
| Some things that came out of the phone/front door analogy:
| 
| 1) Although you can see who is at your front door, 
If I don't recognize them or don't wish to be bothered with
them I can attempt to ignore them.


| 2) The person at the front door is not required to show identification
| -- you can refuse to answer or tell them to leave if they don't, but
| you cannot force them to show identification
If they have chosen not to leave when I attempt to ignore them in case #1
and insist they have reason to speak to me or desire to enter my premises
then they must produce ID or leave.