Re: [atlarge-discuss] $1 verification.

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

James T., and all fellow members,

  Well too have chatted with Louis on a couple of occasions via
Phone.  And frankly I am a bit ashamed to admit it.  The man is
a virtual idiot IMHO.  None the less this part of your point is
well taken and understood by me anyway.

  I am glad to read/hear that you don't believe that any or all forms
of digital identification are not excpetable as the PTO excepts the
readily as I believe you know.  So we are in agreement.  PayPal
bad, other forms of good digital identification expectable.  Now we
need to know or determine WHICH forms of digital identification
can or would be used and are acceptable to the membership, much
along the lines as Abel spoke/wrote to yesterday.  Do you have
any specific suggestions James?  Please advise.

James S. Tyre wrote:

> Yes, indeed you were one of the folks from this list who spoke to me on the
> telephone (not the only), and yes, indeed I was Karl's lawyer in his rather
> successful lawsuit against ICANN.  (I do not assume that most here know
> that, and it wasn't especially relevant to my initial point anyway; though
> it would be pretty funny if, for example, I asked Louis Touton to verify my
> reality, he knows it all too well.)
>
> I did not mean to suggest that all forms of digital verification are
> invalid, and at the same time, I fully recognize that not all here could
> get someone such as Karl to vouch for their bona fides as a real
> person.  My purpose only was to express a concern over what I have been
> reading about using digital to the exclusion of analog.  I suggest only
> that whatever is best in the particular circumstance should be allowed.
>
> At 10:54 PM 5/24/2003 -0700, Jeff Williams wrote:
> >James T., and all fellow members,
> >
> >   As you perhaps recall I called you on the phone and we had a
> >very nice and informative chat regarding Karl's legal action against
> >ICANN and some of the results that you were willing to share with me.
> >So I can couch for you being a real person!  >:)  I also agree with you
> >that Pay Pal in particulars a very poor and invalid means to identify
> >an individual as actually existing or being whom they say they are.
> >Your right that Credit card fraud is too easy and is also at an all time
> >high according to the FTC.
> >
> >   But I would also disagree that all/any digital forms of validation are not
> >adequate in a digital world.  Sure I would also agree that face to face
> >meetings for validation purposes is a better method usually, but not always.
> >For instance when I was assigned long ago now while serving in the
> >USMC, to work in NIS (Navel Intelligence Service) I was provided
> >very good false identification documents (Passport, Drivers License,
> >Several credit cards, ect. ) and was never questioned as to those
> >documents authenticity when ask to present them on many occasions.
> >
> >
> >James S. Tyre wrote:
> >
> > > At 10:46 PM 5/24/2003 -0400, Micheal Sherreill wrote:
> > > >There are many avenues to pursue regarding verification of
> > > >members.  PayPal would seem to be a quick and easy (read cheap) way to
> > > >prove certification as a real, and answerable, human.  One lets PayPal do
> > > >all the bookwork and for US$1 the signature is assured.  If it is good
> > > >enough for the credit card companies it is good enough for me.
> > >
> > > I don't disagree that some form of verification is necessary, but your last
> > > sentence scares me, Michael, defrauding the credit card companies is easy.
> > >
> > > But more than that, I would hate to see this group become too enamored of
> > > technological means of verification.  Using myself as an example only to
> > > make a point, not for any other reason, there are a number of members of
> > > this list who have called me at the phone number in my sig file, have
> > > spoken with me directly at length.  Is that not more reliable than
> > > PayPal?  If not, there are a number of persons whose demonstrated
> > > commitment to relevant Internet issues cannot possibly be questioned who
> > > know me well personally, would gladly vouch for me if I asked.  Would that
> > > not be far more significant than PayPal (which I refuse to use for a number
> > > of reasons)?
> > >
> > > I'm guessing (though I could be wrong) that Michael remembers who I am (and
> > > it doesn't really matter for now anyway, I'm not running for election),
> > > even though for good but personal reasons, I haven't posted here in
> > > ages.  My sole point is that verification by trusted humans is, IMO, far
> > > better than any technological means, so let's not forget that if/when we
> > > get to the point of deciding what does or doesn't count as valid
> > verification.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> James S. Tyre                               mailto:jstyre@jstyre.com
> Law Offices of James S. Tyre          310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
> 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512               Culver City, CA 90230-4969
> Co-founder, The Censorware Project             http://censorware.net

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801



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