From: Panzer Boy <panzer@dhp.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 19:05:35 PDT
To: Chris Knight <cknight@crl.com>
Subject: Re: who, me?!?!
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.87.9404061618.A23687-0100000@crl.crl.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9404062039.A9406-0100000@dhp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Wed, 6 Apr 1994, Chris Knight wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Apr 1994 tmp@netcom.com wrote:
> 
> > !?!?!?!?! detweiler this, detweiler that!!! why does everyone keep
> > calling me `detweiler' when my name is `tmp@netcom.com'?!!
> 
> The above listed information is NOT a name.
You're right, it's an account, just as cknight@crl.com is just an 
account, and you've attached the psueonym "Chris Knight" to it.

> > look, i admit i am posting pseudonymously, but your 
> > detweilerian witchhunt is a good reason why
> 
>   Remember the price of being anonymous... Nobody has to believe a word you 
> say.
Price of being anonymous.  You mean the price of being Obviously 
anonymous.  As opposed to this "Chris Knight" character, who has chosen 
to show himself as to what looks like a real name.  Ever wonder about
Emanuel Goldstein?  That name is as valid as "Chris Knight"

>   Personally, I don't care who you are.  I do think you try to be an 
> asshole, and you love getting on people's nerves.
I'm not going to touch this.  After reading a few of "tmp@netcom"'s 
messages, I aggree that he has been posting what "appear" to be childish 
posts.  But at the same time, there are many other posts here on this 
list with just as much useless information.

Are cypherpunks for anonyminity?  Authentication?  Privacy?  More than one?

 -Matt (Just another alias)
 (panzer@dhp.com)
 "That which can never be enforced should not be prohibited."