NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #30/NN_1992_30.iso/spool/comp/org/eff/talk/7772

Text File | 1992-12-20 | 1.8 KB | 37 lines

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!dman
From: [e-mail] (Dallman Ross)
Subject: Re: WELL anonymity policy
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: inet
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 02:39:22 GMT
Lines: 24

Korac MacArthur ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Yes, but was the fact that you could apply for and GET anonymity
: ever clearly stated?  I doubt it.   This exceptions policy for
: illuminatti is extremely unjust and reminds me of Diane Feinstein when

I've been on The WELL 3 years (almost).  It's true that a statement,
"We occasionally have aliased celebrity accounts," is not in the manual
or in the information a new user reads; but it's no secret.  I've seen
it discussed collaterally in a couply of places in my time on the
system, and it wasn't a big deal.

One reason The WELL wants to provide for a modicum of security about
who's who is that there are some private conferences with qualifi-
cations for enrollment.  For example, there's MOW (Men on The WELL),
where women are not allowed.  In order to join, I had to ask the host,
who knew me personally.  If he had not, I guess further checking would
have been in order before I would have been granted entry.

--
 __D_a l_l m a_n  _ R o_s s _ |[e-mail]  /or/  |"You sound like a man|
 l  \\ l\\   /l  /\\  l\\   l |[e-mail]    |with a rubber nose." |
 l   >)l \\ /ll /  \\ l \\  l |vox/fax: [phone]| -- One-Lung Bill    |
 l  // l  \X ll/--- \\l  \\ l |350 Perkins St., #108  |     Remmer (deceased)
_l//______________________\\l_|Oakland,_CA__94610-3422|_____________________|_