From: "L. McCarthy" <lmccarth@ducie.cs.umass.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 94 22:38:49 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Subject: Re: Critias Unmasked!
In-Reply-To: <199411190445.UAA25798@netcom3.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199411190638.BAA29939@ducie.cs.umass.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Tim May writes:
> Before the (unsigned) reputation of Critias_the_conspirator is tossed
> about further, I was the author of the "anonymous" version.

It's also interesting to note that I managed to form a definite opinion
about the "real" identity of the "real" Critias after reading, oh, about
five words of Critias' first message. I couldn't so easily slap a label on 
Tim's mock Critias because he deliberately altered his writing style. Just a
reminder for those adopting pseudonyms to consider: if your normal style is
known, you need to appropriately pseudonymize the nym's writing style.
"Acting the part" is, after all, the main difficulty in maintaining an
assumed identity.

I'm not sure whether this alters liability issues significantly; if everyone
"knows" you're the person behind a nym which gets in trouble, but can't
conclusively prove it, does that help you ?  I suspect not, especially
considering that the standard of evidence for civil cases like libel is
relatively weak. (If I'm out of my tree and libel is a criminal offense,
please correct me. IANAL, etc.)

- -L. McCarthy


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.1

iQCVAwUBLs2dWGf7YYibNzjpAQEkhQQAgs8UuF2vuttzK5fAZZwzesKT9+Ul6R0u
XO0cje3FU8XzORYAxH+8o3aIswGkaW3HS2zpPFz5AzrDJBXZ3r4Zn0V4t4MBVbOY
SO6I22+TiqVN7/ZgmtULZytTO2qKalgfInHF6GdlWLvbHqMHqu0TaqGOc20x8PZs
77DV6RCLRCg=
=Oef2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----