Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!elroy!spl1!ddsw1!igloo!learn
From: learn@igloo.UUCP (william vajk)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Forgeries: a suggestion for bringing them under control
Message-ID: <388@igloo.UUCP>
Date: 4 Feb 88 23:46:06 GMT
References: <1861@epimass.EPI.COM> <317@dsinc.UUCP> <21986@tis.llnl.gov>
Organization: igloo, Northbrook, IL
Lines: 39
Summary: one individual does not make a general case

In article <21986@tis.llnl.gov>, mcb@tis.llnl.gov (Michael C. Berch) writes:
> With the exception of the annual April Fool's articles, forgery seems
> to be limited to a few groups like alt.flame and some of the talk or
> soc groups.  

Insofar as I can determine, all this flap about pseudos and forged
articles has to do with a single individual. If the balance of the
information disseminated by this individual received as much attention,
we would have a sad state of affairs. Also remember that this
individual called for federal regulation of the net in a futile attempt
to establish (for this individual) an impossible level of credibility.
It is almost predictable that where one avenue has failed, another
would be taken. This one individual does not make a general case
sufficient to undertake the expense and problems associated with
upgrading usenet software to preclude this specific possibility. The
resources available are better spent in continuing upgrades to the
software along the lines already begun.

I, for one, am quite pleased with the features and successes achieved
to date and wish to thank all those who have worked long and hard to
create usenet. If the changes under discussion are realtively easy to
invoke, I will support their inclusion. Under the present circumstances,
however, I view the complaint(s) as a non-problem.

Bill Vajk                                         learn@igloo












> therefor can't justify additional administrative or software costs.
>