From: Johan Helsingius <julf@penet.FI>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 07:39:52 PST
To: Richard Childers <rchilder@us.oracle.com>
Subject: Re: A solution remailer signature suppression
In-Reply-To: <9301040426.AA10757@rchilder.us.oracle.com>
Message-ID: <9301041652.aa07015@penet.penet.FI>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Richard Childers writes:

> It is the user's job to hide his or her identity, but it should not
> be the programmer's responsibility to anticipate the user's failure
> to think at all. Someone who uses these tools without understanding
> the principles upon which they are founded - such as people whom
> accept keys from individuals whom are only electronically known -
> will quickly founder upon their own, um, state of stupor, and one
> should not undertake to protect them from this, as what you are pro-
> -tecting them from, in reality, is the opportunity to learn from
> their mistakes.

Well, in principle I agree. And if I would start from a clean slate, I
would *gladly* leave out the sig stripper. But people in groups such as
alt.sexual.abuse.recovery have come to rely on the behaviour of previous
servers, and are *not* very computer- or e-mail-literate.

	Julf (admin@anon.penet.fi)