[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ga] GA Rules don't go far enough
At 19:14 15.02.00 -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
>All professional societies avoid the problemof identity simply by the
>fact that they charge for membership. If you have to pay for something,
>you have to identify yourself and you have incentive to not pay multiple
>times. Unfortunately, this option is not available to a so-called open
>membership group as the DNSO. However, any serious member of the DNSO
>would, no doubt, belong to one or more professional societies, many of
>whom may have network presences. I know that the ACM and IEEE do, and
>undoubtedly some lawyers groups must along with other groups fitting
>most of the members of the DNSO. Maybe we can work out some method of
>validation with these groups. ACM and IEEE offer e-mail forwarding
>services for members-only.
That's a thought - being a member of the ACM cost me USD 70 and required
proof of posession of a credit card (by virtue of the fact that the charge
didn't bounce).
It would certainly raise the bar on loon identities by a few dollars; this
may be enough.
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