Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!elroy!gryphon!mhnadel From: mhnadel@gryphon.CTS.COM (Miriam Nadel) Newsgroups: news.misc Subject: Re: A serious dilemma for the net Message-ID: <7143@gryphon.CTS.COM> Date: 20 Sep 88 19:15:32 GMT References: <7106@gryphon.CTS.COM> <29839@bbn.COM> Reply-To: mhnadel@gryphon.CTS.COM (Miriam Nadel) Followup-To: alt.flame Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA Lines: 55 In article <29839@bbn.COM> cosell@BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell) writes: >In article <7106@gryphon.CTS.COM> mhnadel@gryphon.CTS.COM (Miriam Nadel) writes: >}This problem might be solved if the management at the Portal System would >}simply replace the "XPortal-User-Id:" line with the user's real name. This >}situation would perhaps force a poster to use more discretion prior to >}posting, knowing that his or her *real* name would be attached to the >}posting. > > This is, at best, a bit difficult to arrange and certainly an untenable > net.precedent. You may object to "Inquisitor" handles, but point of fact > no one knows _anything_ about anybodys name around the net. I suppose one > could argue that "net pseudonyms" are to be verboten, but I'm not sure how > one would enforce that or what penalty might be invoked. There are the > well-known ones (_hobbit comes to mind right away), plus the virtually > useless ones ("From" field is "ajport@", with the signature just > saying "aj" -- so who IS that?) -- will we get to (or have to) vote on > whether a particular net identity is "acceptable"? > This is not terribly difficult to arrange - there is already a line on every posting from Portal which says "XPortal-User-Id:" followed by a sequence of numbers, which indicate which Portaloid has posted that particular piece of drivel. (I admit to having seen a very rare posting from Portal which is not complete drivel, but such postings have always had a real name attached instead of a handle.) Admittedly, we do not know if someone is using their real name. But, in the case of business and university machines, one can track a users affiliation. In addition, the username in the from field won't change, while the name associated with it may, while one needs to waste time with a cryptic bunch of numbers to determine that killer@cup.portal.com is the same dweeb as wasser@cup.portal.com, for example. Other public access sites and private sites do not permit one to avoid taking responsibility for one's postings in the same manner. In addition, Portal's legendary Usenet interface apparently permits one to post without knowing anything about Unix, editors, etc. making it far more accessible to people who cannot be bothered to understand what they're using than other public access sites. Note that we have not taken the extreme step of requesting that Portal be removed from the net. We are merely asking that their users be forced to take responsibility for their actions. I am tired of users who have excessively long signatures. I am tired of users who can't be bothered to use e-mail instead of posting. I am tired of users who don't know how to edit out 240 lines of previous responses before adding a one word reply or nothing at all (except the 16 line signature, including how to reach them by carrier pigeon.) Portal users are certainly not the only people to abuse the net in this manner but, when there are a large number of users at a given site who refuse to practice good netiquette, one can only hold the site responsible. In addition, Portal users - and management - have repeatedly violated the strictures on commercial use of the net. Miriam Nadel -- "I deny that I have ever given my opinion to anybody" - George Bush mhnadel@gryphon.CTS.COM !gryphon!mhnadel