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

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

Eric, Chris and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

  Actually I agree that my response should have been unnecessary.  I
really can't say that it was unproductive or not.  I doubt that you could
in all "Truth" could either Eric.  But none the less your point is
well taken by me.  I only hope that it is also well taken by Chris
and Andrew as well.  But somehow and sadly, I doubt that as well..:(

eric@hi-tek.com wrote:

> This is unnecessary and unproductive.
> e
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> > Chris and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,
> >
> >   This statement shows me clearly that either you have a reading impairment
> > problem have just plain not been paying close enough attention to what I
> > have stated and repeated several times now on this subject/issue. So I will
> > state it very simply and clearly for you here again in CAPS so you can
> > easily read and comprehend it.
> >
> >   I BELIEVE THAT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO FAIRLY, ACCURATELY,
> > COMPLETELY, AND LEGALLY DETERMINE ANY MEMBER OR
> > POTENTIAL MEMBER OF THIS ORGANIZATION AND STILL
> > PROTECT THEIR PRIVACY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS
> > OF THEIR RESIDENT JURISDICTION AND PER EACH MEMBER
> > OR POTENTIAL MEMBERS PRIVACY/SECURITY REQUIREMENTS.
> >
> > NameCritic wrote:
> >
> > > it does not surprise me at all that you have so far been the strongest voice
> > > against any member accountability or proof of who each member actually is.
> > >
> > > Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> > > To: "McMeikan, Andrew" <McMeikanA@logica.com>
> > > Cc: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> > > Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 12:16 AM
> > > 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,
> > > > in fact much easier than photo ID's.  I am not sure what you mean
> > > > by government issued ID's.  ???  It is also very difficult to know
> > > > from members from other countries, which may not have a
> > > > Birth certificate that is legitimate, or any at all, or have a drivers
> > > > license, of photo ID.  A well known example of this would be
> > > > Butros Butros Galli when he first became a representative
> > > > a the UN.  So in conclusion I would venture a guess that
> > > > although in the US and most European countries such ID
> > > > may be both helpful and also divisive at times as well due
> > > > to the huge number of forged identity documents that are
> > > > easily available.
> > > >
> > > >   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
> > > > recommendations that the US FBI suggests is to not
> > > > put copies of you personal ID in image or any other
> > > > format online.  Hence this leaves this organization a
> > > > serious problem in accomplishing identification using such
> > > > ID online not doable for the sake of safety of the members.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 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.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 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:
> > > >
> > > > 1.) Any and all personal information requested, not be mandatory and
> > > should
> > > > in no way impede or reduce the level of servitude of any member in any
> > > capacity
> > > > unless or until the organization can guarantee the privacy and security of
> > > that
> > > > members personal and private information, provide for compensation should
> > > > such and same personal private information be in place and stated in the
> > > form
> > > > of legal liability insurance of no less than $500,000 per individual
> > > incident
> > > > included in that policy.
> > > >
> > > > 2.) Whether or not a individual member whom is self declared as a
> > > >      real person, may participate in any aspect of this organization
> > > >      without incumbency unless or until that member can be proven
> > > >      via a proper legal means as to be non existent.  a.)  That any other
> > > >      member, or officers of this organization may challenge any other
> > > >     member or officer of this organization, in a court of proper
> > > >      jurisdiction, as to their actual identity if and only if, such
> > > >     is approved by the vote of the members, and existing funds
> > > >    to exact or effect such a challenge be approved by the members
> > > >    to adjudicate such a challenge. b.) That no member at any time
> > > >    will be harassed in any way so as to induce or unduly influence
> > > >    that member to accept any online or forum based identity challenge;
> > > >    that said challenge to member or potential new member be ask once
> > > >    and only once and replied to once and only once.  That furthering such
> > > >    a challenge, if perceived needed, or desired by any other single member
> > > >    be required to be done via legal means in a court of proper and legal
> > > >    jurisdiction but that individual member, or if the membership votes
> > > >    in a simple majority of all listed members, with no less than 40%
> > > >    of members voting, the organization than can proceed in a legal
> > > >    challenge in the proper legal jurisdiction should such laws exist
> > > >    for such a legal challenge.  c.) that the practices and laws of the
> > > >    home countries    of the members regarding personal and private
> > > >    information be observed at any and all times, without exception.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Only a dedicated few will want to be in 4, many persistent people who
> > > care
> > > > > will be prepared to be in 3.
> > > > >
> > > > > The vast unwashed masses will surely only care for 2, with the paranoids
> > > in
> > > > > 1.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is such a system practical?
> > > > >
> > > > >         cya,    Andrew...
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Deif Fenderson [mailto:idiscreditfrauds@indiatimes.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 4:02 AM
> > > > > > To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
> > > > > > Subject: [atlarge-discuss] Identity WG and limiting posts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Members of the WG-ID group,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Could you please tell us where things are going?  We
> > > > > > desperately need some action here.  We must have *REAL*
> > > > > > people in our group if we are to be taken seriously.  I
> > > > > > seriously doubt the 1000 member level.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Remember the votes in our election?  There are at least 12
> > > > > > zombis in this mailing list group! And there is one REAL big
> > > > > > annoyance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There have been repeated calls for a limit on the number of
> > > > > > posts a person can make a day.  Please we must implement this
> > > > > > soon, before all the normal people are scared away.  And
> > > > > > beleive me, our credibility as a group is being seriously
> > > > > > compromized.  We have people with no authority setting up
> > > > > > bank accounts for this group and proposing to send speakers
> > > > > > from non-existant companies to represent us in Singapore.  If
> > > > > > we are going to get anything useful done, we've got to clear
> > > > > > out some of the noise!!!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Either verify the identity of our members (I seriously doubt
> > > > > > we still have 1000 members) or impose some posting controls.
> > > > > > It's not censorship!  Make the number of posts high enough to
> > > > > > allow for a debate - but one day this kook posted 30 times.
> > > > > > Make the threshold 8, and we can reduce some of this crap and
> > > > > > porvide releif to people with slower connections.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you for your action.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Deif
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ==============================================
> > > > > > I Discredit Frauds.
> > > > > > See the incredible claims!
> > > > > > Learn who Jeffrey A. Williams is:
> > > > > > http://www.angelfire.com/clone/jeffwilliams/
> > > > > > ==============================================
> > > > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at
> > > > > http://email.indiatimes.com
> > > > > Buy Music, Video, CD-ROM, Audio-Books and Music Accessories from
> > > > > http://www.planetm.co.in
> > > > > Change the way you talk. Indiatimes presents "Valufon", Your PC to Phone
> > > > > service with clear voice at rates far less than the normal ISD rates. Go
> > > to
> > > > > http://www.valufon.indiatimes.com. Choose your plan. BUY NOW.
> > > > >
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> >
> > 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
>

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