From: Jonathan Rochkind <jrochkin@cs.oberlin.edu>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 94 11:13:23 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: pseudonyms and such
Message-ID: <199407181813.OAA19246@cs.oberlin.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


I think it's rather odd to find cypherpunks basically flaming someone 
because they choose to use a pseudonym instead of their real name. 
Or presuming guilt of being Detweiler because of the choice to use the
pseudonym.  Isn't the right to hide one's official on-your-passport
identity something that we all supposedly support?  Seems kind of contrary
to this goal to go making anyone who exercises this right feel unwelcome
on the list.  
 
I'm sure if someone had mailed this sue person, and politey explained why they
felt her posts to be inappropriate, she would have changed her behavior.
And if she didn't, _then_ you could try to make her feel as unwelcome as
possible. Sure, this plan of action means that Detweiler-spoofs are
a bit more effective, and detweiler identities will take a bit longer to
be "outed".  And preventing the clipper chip from becoming a standard means that
drug dealers will have a bit of an easier time, especially if we succeed
in making PGP standard. Or terrorists. Such is the cost of being fair. 
 
I think it's awfully hypocritical to judge this pseudonomous person
harshly merely because of her pseudonimity, or because that 
pseudonimity makes you suspect she's really detweiler.