From: nobody@cicada.berkeley.edu
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 06:53:02 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Remailer Abuse?
Message-ID: <9311081451.AA11051@cicada.berkeley.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


hh@cicada.berkeley.edu says:

> Harassing other users is considered abuse, and sending chain letters is a
> form of harassing other users.  However, it's not a very serious form of
> abuse.  If I found conclusive evidence that someone were sending something
> like childporn through my remailer, I would take some pretty drastic
> actions.

Interesting.  I wonder what those drastic actions would be? 

People sending serious death threats and the like through anon remailers
should be aware that those actions are considered seriously anti-social
and may cause them some problems.  But I don't view "kiddie porn" the same
way.  Its very definition is VERY ill-defined, and there is widespread
disagreement on how much of an evil threat to truth, justice, and the
American Way it really poses.  This makes me start to think that borderline
policies like this should be well publicized by the operator of the remailer.

I don't support the kiddie porn witch hunt going on in the U.S. currently,
and would not have assumed that posting what many people consider to be
harmless photos of kids under 18 would get someone automatically turned in
to the cops.  (Again, keep in mind that the definition is very fuzzy.  Some
people who have been busted as kiddie pornographers have been busted for
extremely mild and un-pornographic material that no reasonable person would
consider harmful.) 

.....Cindy