Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!ptownson
From: ptownson@eecs.nwu.edu (Patrick A. Townson)
Subject: Re: stealing passwords is easy!
Message-ID: <1991Jun9.145317.618@eecs.nwu.edu>
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
References: <14885.284ECCAC@fidogate.FIDONET.ORG>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1991 14:53:17 GMT

In article <14885.284ECCAC@fidogate.FIDONET.ORG> tom.jennings@f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG (tom jennings) writes:

>> A user identified is a user who does not make trouble. Anytime a
>> sysop can pick up the phone and call a user to ask "why would you
>> have posted the message you did when you were on line today", the
>> sysop has one less user to worry about.  

> Yeeow! Thought police!
> Do I have to pee in a jar? Will you hold it?  

Don't say something stupid like that. The one has nothing to do with
the other. People should be able to post what they want within the
general parameters the BBS has established for its users. No sysop who
is trying to run a fair and open dialogue for his users is going to
harass someone based on the *content* of their speech.

But if you are going to say a sysop has no right to even know who is
making which speeches *he* (sysop) might be held accountable for,
then all I can say is god bless you and run your BBS however you like.

You still seem to have some confusion in your own mind about the
difference between free speech and the use of other people's property
to make your speech.  

Have it your own way, Sir. If you feel happier comparing the whole
thing to drug testing, then do that.   

Patrick T.