Xref: utzoo news.admin:1540 talk.bizarre:7751
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!udel!gatech!hubcap!ncrcae!ncr-sd!crash!gryphon!richard
From: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton)
Newsgroups: news.admin,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Forgeries: a suggestion for bringing them under control
Message-ID: <2302@gryphon.CTS.COM>
Date: 28 Jan 88 09:45:24 GMT
References: <1861@epimass.EPI.COM>
Reply-To: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton)
Followup-To: talk.bizarre
Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA
Lines: 28

In article <1861@epimass.EPI.COM> jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck) writes:
>Lately, the net has suffered because of a rash of forgeries.
>Controversial posters such as Mark Ethan Smith and Matt Weiner have
>been the main victims so far, and I know that neither of these people
>is wildly popular with news administrators, but the latest incident
>-- a forged newgroup message pretending to be from Gene Spafford --
>should give us all pause.  If we don't stomp hard on this now,
>the net will never be the same again.  One of the things I like
>about the net is the ability to get the definitive word from somebody
>like Dennis Ritchie.  If the current trend continues, you'll no
>longer have any confidence whether that was the real Dennis Ritchie
>or an imposter.  And the flame wars will be endless.

But does it matter ?  Isn't this the Dennis Ritchie Turing test ?

If the net is undergoing one of it's periodical 6 months UNIX weenie
arguments and a posting from "dmr@alice" comes along and ends the
discussion right there, no arguments, does it matter if it REALLY
WAS Dennis ?

Indeed, how do you know Dennis really wrote 'C' ?  Maybe it was Joe
Talmadge forging this "Dennis" persons name on everything ?


-- 
      "...and before too long I might, see those flashing red lights" 
                          richard@gryphon.CTS.COM 
   {ihnp4!scgvaxd!cadovax, philabs!cadovax, codas!ddsw1} gryphon!richard