From: "Kenneth Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--On Wednesday, August 02, 2006 11:09 AM -0400 Rob McEwen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Honestly, I haven't been following this thread much... but I do want to
add that the UN is full of thugs who are power hungry and would like very
much to control the Internet and implement a world tax and probably a tax
on the Internet as well.
Good point. While stopping spam, we shouldn't destroy anonymity. I'm sure
repressive regimes like North Korea and Iran would love an anti-spam
measure that let them keep better tabs on what their citizens are saying.
I'd love to see your reaction if somebody anonymously stalks you (I've
been a victim of that before) or manages to libel or slander you. If
you cannot find the person you cannot protect yourself or litigate the
ill done to you. I fail to see the need for absolute anonymity. I do
see a need for "routine anonymity" that can be pierced if absolutely
required. (That slightly more than a year I spent as perhaps one of
the VERY first online stalking victims ever (1985-1987) was a hell
I'd rather not repeat. - - - MUCH later I heard the perp committed
suicide, finally, when he could not get his life back together. His
reputation did him in once it was prosecuted - for credit fraud related
to the means he used for his stalking. Fine was $1000. Lawyer fees
ate all his resources. His wife left him. He returned to Germany. Had
problems there. Eventually he gave up. I CANNOT say I am sorry about
that. It was a living Hell. And being reminded of it leaves me more
than a little "testy", which is why I chewed on some people yesterday
more than I should have. I had to explain about this to a friend who
is also a list manager early yesterday. Not a nice way to start the
day. The bright side of it is that the incident prompted me to look up
someone who was there and had reported on it, Brock Meeks. He's done
quite well for himself, it seems. Congratulations to him.)
"The only absolute rule is that there are no absolute rules."
{o.o}
