Re: [at large-discuss] Identity WG and limiting posts.

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Andrew and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

Also comments interspersed below...

McMeikan, Andrew wrote:

> Comments interspersed.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com]
> > Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 3:16 PM
> > To: McMeikan, Andrew
> > Cc: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
> > Subject: Re: [at large-discuss] Identity WG and limiting posts.
> >
> >
> > Andrew and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,
> >
> > McMeikan, Andrew wrote:
> >
> > > While I am seriously against censorship and invasions of
> > privacy I believe
> > > that any representative that can take an official office
> > must be established
> > > as a real and verifiable person.
> > >
> > > Birth certificate, government issued photo ID and other
> > hard to forge
> > > documents can help in this.
> >
> >   None of these documents are difficult to forge.  Drivers licenses
> > in most US states have photo's on them and are still very easy to
> > forge.  Birth certificates in the US are also very easy to
> > forge as well,
> <snip>
> Anything can be forged, but it gives some measure that an attempt to verify
> has been made.

  Not anything, but almost anything can be forged yes.  But that was not
the gist or point of my reply which you snipped off I see...

>
> Would someone forge a dozen documents just to throw a vote?

Yes.  And it is done pretty frequently even in the US in state elections
or referendum ballots in states in the US.  Of course should you inquire,
as we [INEGRoup] did, that is our legal guys and I did, you will find
that this sort of thing happens often.  Chicago is a good example
that has some notoriety and well publicly documented.

  In other countries, Nigeria come to mind here, this sort of thing is
done almost in every election.  See recent election results in Nigeria.

> If they did it
> would severely increase the chances of getting caught.

  Is this a question or a statement?

>  Also the risk of
> prosecution would be a deterrent.

  That's a laugh!  They are rarely caught, and even less often prosecuted.
COst of prosecution is high in these cases as the burden of proof
is difficult to obtain and even more difficult to present in court adequately
if there is a strong defense offered, and there usually is.  See 1st US
district court records on these types or cases as well as 9th district,
and 11th district court cases of this nature for further reference.  And these
are just the US cases!!

>
>
> >
> >   The second and likely more difficult problem with the
> > helpfulness of these documents is answering the obvious
> > question as to how do you protect against Identity theft
> > now becoming a huge problem in the US.  One of the
> <snip>
> Very valid point I can relate to as I have had (admittedly minor) exposure
> to this sort of behaviour.  Yet my details are public by my choice.  I would
> fight for the right of others to choose differently from me.

  I have fought for that very right!  I would do so again!

>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > In fact just a telephone number is probably all that's
> > really needed most of
> > > the time with only those holding positions of power
> > (treasurer etc.) having
> > > to divulge more details.
> >
> >   Well some or many members or potential members outside of
> > the US may not have their own Phone number of a phone in
> > their own name.
> > Still others yet in the US, may have a silent or unlisted
> > number they do not
> > wish available to this or any other organization.  But in
> > many instances in the
> > US, you are right, the fact that a member or potential member that has
> > a Phone number in their own name would be adequate for basic
> > identification
> > purposes.  However in China, and many asian countries this would
> > not be a good or viable identification method or means.
> >
>
> If someone is hard to contact, odds are they wont be chosen as treasurer or
> spokesperson, if you see this as unfair or discrimination perhaps it is.

Well for instance, our [INEGroup] treasurer is not and easy gut to get
in touch with.  Neither is ICANN's or the Treasurer of the United States,
or the Red Cross as extreme examples of both ends of this scale/discussion
and debate.  Hence it is a matter of discretion, judgment (which in our case
should be made by the members as to the availability of the treasurer or any
officer of this organization), and perception as to the availability and fairness
of such...

>
> You do need to discriminate to pick the most suited, at some point you have
> to say that they have a phone, or ready access to one and can show who they
> are somehow.

  IF they are a registered voter than their voting registration information is
publicly available via a FOIA request to the proper authorities.  It is
incumbent on the member or members to do this sort of independent
checking themselves, not the potential officer/treasurer (your example),
to do this checking either individually or through a reputable and trusted
independent organization/agency that specializes in this sort of due diligence.

>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > I would still like to believe that there is a place for
> > anonymous comments.
> > >
> > > How do people see the following set up.
> > >
> > > 1. anonymous guest comments in forums, public comment areas
> > > 2. unverified, email address, persistent nyms.  - regular
> > contributors who
> > > do not wish to disclose private details.
> > > 3. contactable verified persons, able to hold positions
> > > 4. Highly accountable, we know where they live, can successfully get
> > > arrested if they run off with the cash box.  Need plenty of
> > details. Able to
> > > hold important office and be legally responsible.
> >
> >   This might be fine/fair or adequate for US citizens if and
> > only if there
> > is adequate security methods, legal liability insurance, and
> > filed affidavit
> > to protect the identify of those members whom this specific
> > information
> > is kept on file and that the incorporation of this
> > organization is in the
> > US also.  It would not be fine/fair or even close to adequate
> > for members
> > or potential members outside the US, especially in Asia and
> > even in some
> > EU countries as you outline it above, Andrew.
> >
> >   The other problem I see here is that such private
> > information must also
> > be protected from unsolicited advertising, and online SPAM, or sale
> > of that members name and personal details to various companies
> > that sell lists of names and addresses/phone numbers for the purposes
> > of selling them something that the member did not request.  There are
> > several federal laws in the US called consumer protection laws that
> > carry some severe consequences along these lines.
> >
> >   Hence I would suggest the following:
> >
> <much legalese demanding equal rights for fake ids snipped>
> Not workable and you know it.  I love anonymous speech, I think that
> impeding it is wrong.  I also think it is self evident that to expect
> anonymity to carry the same trust and reputation as a publicly open person
> speaking is totally preposterous.

  I am not suggesting such.  Hence I don't understand your contention here..
Also the determination or definition of a "totally open person" is not
well defined or often defined differently in different jurisdictions, even
amongst states in the US.

>  Not only are you proposing this but
> suggesting paying for huge sums of insurance in the case of privacy leaks.

  No not huge.  We [INEGroup] pay about $450.00/month for this coverage.
Hardly huge.  But yes I am not only suggesting such, but I think you will
find that most non-profits have similar or even better insurance coverage
for this sort of circumstance in a membership organization, even if they are
not incorporated.

>
>
> Privacy in the case of making motions, voting and representing the group is
> unworkable for two reasons.
>
> Technical: if its in a computer someone can get it, regardless of
> precautions insured or otherwise.

  Not true.  I have dared, and even paid several hackers to try to get to
our database of this very same type of information.  None have been
successful yet.  As an expert in such technical security matters, I can speak
with some authority here.  One way of doing this is to keep such information
on non-perminant media, such as DVD's or a CD physically based
database...  Another and also in addition to non-perminant media for
storage of such records would be to encrypt the data on that media
as well as keeping that media off-line and in a remote safe storage facility.

>
>
> Practical: Of all people you should know that when a bold statement is made
> that questions are immediately asked such as who are you really?  Are your
> members real?  Prove it!

  I don't have to prove it!  It is readily available to you via a FOIA request
to the FEC.  So you can seek that information yourself at any time you so
choose.

>
>
> Perhaps this is the way of an uncaring and hostile world, but that is the
> way it is.

  No it is not the way it is Andrew.  You are grossly mistaken here I am
afraid...

>  It is not needed for me to prove you do not exist.  It is needed
> that you prove you DO exist.

 Incorrect again.  If you do not think I exist, than it is up to you to
prove that I don't.  That is the Law of the land Andrew.

> This is not a direct request for you to prove
> yourself personally, your comments stand on their merit not on yours.

  Yes they surely do!  Thankfully under the Credit protection act, Privacy
Act and several other federal laws as well as international precepts, I
do not have to prove whom I am any more the you do or anyone else does.
If you doubt my identity, than it is incumbent upon YOU to prove your
contention.  I have been to court on this very issue myself twice.  That
was the ruling in the prelim's and the cases were dismissed as frivolous.

>  If as
> a group we make a press release, you can bet we will be called to prove just
> who we are.

  Oh?  Well possibly so in some instances.  But there will be no requirement
to acknowledge or oblige such a request.  I never have any trouble getting
press to wish to interview me or others in our organization.  In fact the
opposite is the case.  I don't do many interviews with the press unless
I know and have some idea just what is going to be reported and more
especially how it will be reported.

> The press would have a field day if we said to them, prove we
> don't exist, instead of having some firm details at hand for them.

  Really?  Again I have never had that problem nor has INEGroup.

>
>
> I gave personal details to ICANN, they sent me a letter granting (oh such
> short lived) voting rights.  ICANN had a very large at-large membership.
> Will us as a group really loose so many because we want to be sure who they
> are?

  Yes we could.  But that is really not the issue.  Hence the issue is do we need
to prove whom each member is, how can we possibly do that in most
countries, even our own with certantity, and what measure of accuracy
is necessary or reasonable?  These are the relevant questions that WILL
be necessary lest we seek to face serious legal action that could and likely
would result in significant financial damage such as Lexus-Nexus suffered.

>
>
>         cya,    Andrew...
>
> This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only.  It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege.  It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party.  If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender.  Thank you.
>
>

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de