Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!yetti!geac!mnetor!uunet!seismo!kitty!larry
From: larry@kitty.UUCP
Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Responsibility for postings.
Message-ID: <2152@kitty.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 24-Oct-87 01:45:32 EST
Article-I.D.: kitty.2152
Posted: Sat Oct 24 01:45:32 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Oct-87 17:05:41 EST
References: <4611@videovax.Tek.COM> <2294@umn-cs.UUCP> <1606@dasys1.UUCP> <563@bucket.UUCP>
Organization: Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, NY
Lines: 65
Summary: Perhaps THIS will be my last comment on the topic...
Xref: yetti news.admin:1081 misc.legal:2391 alt.flame:272

In article <563@bucket.UUCP>, minerva@bucket.UUCP (Minerva) writes:
> And what about the vile stuff YOU have posted to soc.women. Aren't you just as
> guilty with the attacks you made on Eileen McGowan?

	Would you like me to post (to soc.women only, of course), the complete
text of all of the articles by Ms. McGowan which I used as a reference?  I
think you KNOW by now that I carefully archive and reference articles before
I make a statement.

> Or are there one set
> of rules for Mark Smith and another for you?

	One set of rules for all; nothing inconsistent with what I have said.

> And what about accusing Mark of fraud and deception??

	With the result of the "court case" investigation, there is even
more probable cause to use the words "fraud and deception".

> So, now that you KNOW that Mark Smith really exists and that that the legal
> name of that person, how about a more appropriate apology?

	I don't know that "Mark Ethan Smith" is it's LEGAL name; it could
very well be an assumed name or alias adopted without court order.  Using 
an assumed name or alias without a court-sanctioned change of name may
facilitate a fraud or deception, but it is not, per se, unlawful; as an
example, many criminals use an assumed name or alias at the time of their
arrest - this in itself is not unlawful.
	Using an assumed name or alias (without a court-sanctioned change)
need not disqualify one as plaintiff in a lawsuit (I can provide references
to this point, if you so desire).
	If you could give me details to verify "Smith's" alleged previous
name and the court in which a statutory name change to "Smith" occurred,
perhaps I could make a more conciliatory comment.  At the moment, no apology
is in order.

> Adding this to your most recent disregard of a person's privacy by posting
> the home address of Mark, you just keep providing proof that you're one of 
> the biggest hypocrites of the net.

	I posted COMPLETE information from a PUBLIC record.  I fail to see
your charge of hypocrisy.  You wouldn't want to accuse me of intentionally
omitting something, would you?

> >	For any system administrators of sites which continue to allow
> >"Smith" to post, are you PROUD to have this person speak in behalf of
> >your organization?  Are you SO PROUD that you will even endure the
> >continual accusa
> 
> Well, the rest of the article didn't reach this site.

continual accusations of your own user that persons with root privileges
on your own system interfere with this person's use of your own system?

> Actually, I'll be quite surprised if he acknowledges this at all.

	Wrong.  BTW, as long as you have invoked my name and compelled me to
be here with the above remark, I would like to do some good and point out
your 12-line .signature is in poor taste since it exceeds the Net guidelines
by a factor of 3.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York
<>  UUCP:  {allegra|ames|boulder|decvax|rutgers|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  VOICE: 716/688-1231       {hplabs|ihnp4|mtune|seismo|utzoo}!/
<>  FAX:   716/741-9635 {G1,G2,G3 modes}   "Have you hugged your cat today?"