|
|
| Author |
Message |
tocohl
|
|
Hidden Identities
| 
Dec 19 22:00 UTC 1991 |
I think we would probably all agree that pseudos are a lot of fun. But
how about pseudos that aren't designed for "fun" -- but to hide someone's
identity? Is that okay on a bbs?
|
| 28 responses total. |
keats
|
|
response 1 of 28:
|
Dec 20 01:28 UTC 1991 |
hide for what purposes? privacy? protection? vindictiveness? other? are
we discussing "spite"? kali? mulberry? ted?
|
remmers
|
|
response 2 of 28:
|
Dec 20 12:32 UTC 1991 |
"Fun" and hiding of one's identity are compatible activities.
If person X posts things anonymously, and these postings result in
an undeserved problem for person Y that would not be a problem for
Y if X posted the same things non-anonymously, then one can fairly
say that X is abusing anonymity.
|
bad
|
|
response 3 of 28:
|
Dec 20 16:50 UTC 1991 |
Or if X uses the pseudo simply to vent hostility, and attack Y, when X
would not do so non-anonymously.
Obnoxiousness without the threat of reprisal is unpleasant.
|
polygon
|
|
response 4 of 28:
|
Dec 22 19:06 UTC 1991 |
What if X uses a pseudo to vent hostility, and attack X? It would look
pretty silly if done non-anonymously.
|
bad
|
|
response 5 of 28:
|
Dec 23 00:18 UTC 1991 |
If somebody does that, I can't help them.
Self-flagellation is not encouraged.
(now, I coudl see a couple of people here doing so, attacking their "real"
personas, just to create or maintain an image as "injured party"...hmmn...)
|
reach
|
|
response 6 of 28:
|
Dec 23 05:33 UTC 1991 |
Daniel Napolitano created me to cast aspersions on his character.
|
keats
|
|
response 7 of 28:
|
Dec 23 12:11 UTC 1991 |
no, i'd have done a better job, really. <whoosh>.
|
bad
|
|
response 8 of 28:
|
Dec 24 04:48 UTC 1991 |
<whoosh>?
|
keats
|
|
response 9 of 28:
|
Jan 3 04:56 UTC 1992 |
(i was just reaching.)
|
bad
|
|
response 10 of 28:
|
Jan 3 11:24 UTC 1992 |
Hmmn...
More than a little strange.
I knew I shouldn't hang out in this cf.
|
spite
|
|
response 11 of 28:
|
Jan 22 02:33 UTC 1992 |
Are we discussing me? Can I cast aspersions on somebody? Have I?
|
reach
|
|
response 12 of 28:
|
Feb 23 14:26 UTC 1992 |
You have, but they only went so far as you could throw them.
|
spite
|
|
response 13 of 28:
|
Feb 24 04:29 UTC 1992 |
Well, I'm glad you noticed where they landed. Please, be electronically
responsible and recycle them. Even recycled, they're a better product
than your new stuff.
|
alterego
|
|
response 14 of 28:
|
Mar 2 05:08 UTC 1992 |
I can see some real problems arisising from pseudo masks used for libel
or slander. The Constitution states, in the Sixth Amendment:
[The accused shall enjoy the right]; to be confronted with the witnesses
against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his
favor,"
How can one defend him/herself against attacks from parties using
pseudos for damaging statements (substantiated or not) if you can't
identify them? Can they be compelled to identify themselves? Can the
sysop compel someone to confirm their real identity before being allowed
online?
|
remmers
|
|
response 15 of 28:
|
Mar 2 10:20 UTC 1992 |
The passage from the Constitution refers to people formally
accused of crimes by the state, not to private speech. If
somebody says something derogatory about me, I can't "compel"
people with the opposite opinion to speak in my favor.
Owners of bbs's can, of course, require validation of users if
they want to. But they don't have to. And it has nothing to
do with the "rights of the accused".
|
spite
|
|
response 16 of 28:
|
Mar 4 04:07 UTC 1992 |
Can a pseudo slander a pseudo?
|
bad
|
|
response 17 of 28:
|
Mar 4 04:32 UTC 1992 |
If anyone can, I'll bet you could! :)
I have faith in you, my psuedo...
|
reach
|
|
response 18 of 28:
|
Mar 13 05:58 UTC 1992 |
Faith can be a dangerous thing.
|
spite
|
|
response 19 of 28:
|
May 11 00:19 UTC 1992 |
Not as long as you fall well.
|
reach
|
|
response 20 of 28:
|
May 20 05:30 UTC 1992 |
When I was young, I attended a small catholic high school with a girl
named Faith. The sisters found this nowhere near as funny as the pupils.
Neither was Faith amused, and she exacted revenge (for teasing) at every
opportunity. She particularly reveled in convincing other girls that they
were going to hell, no matter what.
|
spite
|
|
response 21 of 28:
|
Jun 18 18:40 UTC 1992 |
Did they?
|
reach
|
|
response 22 of 28:
|
Jun 19 14:04 UTC 1992 |
Go look.
|
spite
|
|
response 23 of 28:
|
Jan 29 03:09 UTC 1993 |
I called. They said they'd been looking for you because you'd been
away quite a while.
They asked you to pick up some milk on the way home.
|
wish
|
|
response 24 of 28:
|
Jan 10 06:42 UTC 1994 |
Don't milk me! =)
|