1994-07-29 - Re: Just say NYET to kneejerking

Header Data

From: Berzerk <berzerk@xmission.xmission.com>
To: nzook@math.utexas.edu
Message Hash: b4a81de6e20fc5f8eb081d1e73f882de5e48dac2fb89bcd22a6734bec661c8a5
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9407291150.A22625-0100000@xmission>
Reply To: <9407290326.AA16170@owl.ma.utexas.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-29 17:54:31 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 29 Jul 94 10:54:31 PDT

Raw message

From: Berzerk <berzerk@xmission.xmission.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 94 10:54:31 PDT
To: nzook@math.utexas.edu
Subject: Re: Just say NYET to kneejerking
In-Reply-To: <9407290326.AA16170@owl.ma.utexas.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9407291150.A22625-0100000@xmission>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Thu, 28 Jul 1994 nzook@math.utexas.edu wrote:

> I must admit that I'm disappointed.  I figured that I would take some hits,
> but for people to only scan a post before reaching for the lighter...
Hi, I hope that you read mine.  I am favorable to EVERTHING you are 
saying EXCEPT the identification part.  It is too much power.  You have 
no need for this.  Just make dsclosure of age bracket mandatory.  This 
gives the "beast" the minimal information to play with and does EXACTLY 
what you want to do.  

Also, I would be very interested in trying to provide a censorship 
service.  I think the most valuable thing you could do is to provide 
services orented to this.