Re: [ga] GA Rules don't go far enough

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>]

At 13:47 14.02.00 -0800, William X. Walsh wrote:

>I again renew my call that all members of the GA list must validate by some
>form of identification, such as a govt. issued ID.
>
>It is way too easy for people with AOL accounts or any of the numerous free
>email/ISP services to just create new/additional aliases.
>
>I am prepared to send in a copy of my state issued ID, and I see no reason 
>why this should not be a requirement.  Many conferences require the same 
>type of thing at check-in, so this would be no different.   Otherwise we 
>will continue to be subjected to the PCCF's and INEGroup's numerous 
>aliases and attempts to disrupt, and who knows who else who might be 
>participating with the intent to disrupt.

I think this proposal warrants consideration for the debate on permanent 
rules that we need to have before the end of April.
The immediate objections I have to it are:

- Processing costs for sending, receiving, verifying and storing the
   documentation. Someone has to cover this.
- The fact that it is not useful against a disrupter who is willing to be
   identified. So it can't be the only rule.

But it belongs on the table for April.

                     Harald

--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html