From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 17:57:47 +0800
To: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Crisis with Remailers
In-Reply-To: <01I50KKMD21Q8Y4X9G@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.93.960522211844.18119B-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Wed, 22 May 1996, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:

> From:	IN%"bruce@aracnet.com"  "Bruce Baugh" 22-MAY-1996 17:00:33.67
> 
> >Pointing people at legitimate uses of anonymity, as various folks have
> >suggested, is undoubtedly a good idea. Would anyone care to suggest a few
> >newsgroups where the vast majority of anonymous posts have really good
> >reasons for being so?
> 
> 	While it isn't usage of true cypherpunk remailers, the sexual abuse
> survivors newsgroup(s) would appear to be a place to start. Some of the groups
> discussing human rights cases are also a possibility, as is
> alt.religion.scientology. 

To those unfamiliar with the issues, ars is not a good example. At first,
it looks like a bunch of louts screaming.

I'd mention alt.revisionism, where anonymity is used and recognized by all
sides, usually responsibly (though that probably wasn't true before I
dropped in). It's the stupid skinheads configuring Netscape with
"anonymous" addresses that bug me; I usually find their real address and
tell them how to get a real remailer or freenet account. 

Of course, to people who don't know what to filter, alt.revisionism also
looks like a bunch of louts screaming. 

-rich