IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Anonymous postings

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 22 October 2013 00:28 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC2B111E87AD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:28:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.078
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.078 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.479, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_SUMOF=5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dQJ+yXfx1In5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:28:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-x231.google.com (mail-pd0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5E011E871F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f177.google.com with SMTP id p10so6083121pdj.22 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=29xcElW2QYlc1Xo4PTWS/eXi7rWLFxcxjh5w6oItvz0=; b=WL+hek6fOjFloWn3bH928G0DMf4aF9eFOaq0CmmzIQVgNAlJZmq1GSQ2waznnzh4aO qnrmq/3X/YjxE5FO6HrMVtPAuuiW1ufUA4W/krg1udZWkg56z8TVQHlGFbco+oo1wIqs ALNn0L1yMhuSFzlUykPaIIHKszt9ge7fcZBruLpgf16sl6YIilrHZDAvVI8Hs7eACBEc uI1N4VzcSdpcLx3TjChvaJU3oS6gW8SuAo5ef4O3YSXmIJcR++1ak9H/edVE/HCB9mnT q58YMI1nIniGO56ZXB5UDwAXQtCyy4j2oK186oU6cnIhjyqoffIg2cJQhWZqjq4SW3NO 2ocA==
X-Received: by 10.67.23.227 with SMTP id id3mr20726685pad.101.1382401675718; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] (254.194.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.194.254]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b3sm23514822pbu.38.2013.10.21.17.27.53 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5265C68B.1050206@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:27:55 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Anonymous postings
References: <5262FB95.8080500@gmail.com> <CAK41CSRKhD9W5WWm3xBJeb4U8Q6TbfG1EHnY_0BN7fC1QvO=iA@mail.gmail.com> <52657B0B.3080701@gmail.com>, <6.2.5.6.2.20131021130523.0c4a6db8@resistor.net> <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E3E25D8D@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <5265A349.6090902@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5265A349.6090902@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 00:28:02 -0000

On 22/10/2013 10:57, Melinda Shore wrote:
> On 10/21/13 1:37 PM, l.wood@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
>> A persistent identifier is helpful in sustained shared multiparty
>> conversation; whether it represents a "real" person or not does not
>> matter.
> 
> Right, this is clearly a problem as stated, but there's a long
> history of people posting from and participating from those
> addresses, while the other is some individual whose only posts
> were ad hominem.  So what's of interest here probably isn't
> anon-/pseudonymity, but some sort of reputation or track record.

I agree, but in this case the email address was obscure, the
content was irrelevant, and the tone was, at least to my eyes,
highly provocative. It was the sum of those three aspects that
set me off.

If someone sends well argued technical comments, or comments
on IETF procedural questions, using a pseudonym, that would
be a different matter. I can certainly imagine circumstances
in which somebody might prefer to do that.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email