One small step for mankind...
 

On Mar 10, 6:57*pm, HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:39 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:23 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Posted on Thu, Mar. 06, 2008
Anonymous Web postings targeted
BILL WOULD REQUIRE NAMES, ADDRESSES
By John Cheves

A bill filed in the House would keep Kentuckians from posting
anonymous
comments to Web sites.
House Bill 775, filed Tuesday by Rep. Tim Couch, R-Hyden, would
require
anyone who contributes to a Web site to register a real name,
address
and e-mail address with that Web site. The person's full name
then would
be used whenever he or she posted a comment.
Web site operators who violate the disclosure law would be fined
$500
for a first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense.
Couch readily acknowledged on Wednesday that his bill raises First
Amendment issues regarding free speech, so he won't be pushing
it. But
he wanted to call attention to the phenomenon of unkind and
often untrue
comments about people being posted online by Kentuckians hiding
behind
the cloak of anonymity.
"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my
district,
usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too.."
"When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about
someone,
and nobody knows who you are," he said.
Couch said he, too, has been the subject of anonymous online
roasting,
and while he doesn't enjoy it, he doesn't think there's much the
legislature can do about it.
"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its
own. It's
a machine that's going to go its own way," Couch said. "The
state can
try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do
anything."
- - -
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's
a start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full,
real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a
political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.
Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.
Harry,
Beside you telling us your name is Harry Krause, you are just as
anonymous as "Reggie". *No one really knows which Harry Krause you
are,
there are many in the US and what your home address and phone
number is.
* We really don't know for certain if your name really is Harry
Krause,
or it is just a UseNet persona. *If everyone had to submit to a
background check, and all of the information was in the public domain,
what would you do differently when communicating with someone in
UseNet?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know who he is, and could call him right now or send him a letter,
directly to his house... Just for the record...
Yes, but how do I know you are not lying to *me? *;)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Guess you got me there;) How do you know I am not another sock puppet
produced in the mind of our alledged Mr. Krause for that matter?

I think Krause's fingers would would go stiff, his head would start
shaking and he would fall out of his chair if he had to type some of the
stuff you have typed.

Damned close.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What's even worse is when Harry goes on secret missions for the DNC
and I have to type all that anti American BS.. man it's tough to sound
that crazy.

One small step for mankind...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

wrote:

On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's a
start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full, real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.

Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.


Heh. You realize, don't you Harry, that a picture you posted a while
back of your Vista desktop clearly showed a shortcut to a program called,
"Hide My ISP" ?

Not being "snarky", but everytime you complain about anonymity I think of
that image and program.

Eisboch


So?

What's that got to do with my desire to end anonymous usenet posting?
Ending anonymous posting would make this a far more pleasant place, though
I'd bet real money at about a dozen of the snarkiest posters here would
find another hobby.

This is not a smart ass question. Do you have a listed telephone number? If
not, why not?

One small step for mankind...
 

One small step for mankind...
 

D.Duck wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's a
start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full, real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.
Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.

Heh. You realize, don't you Harry, that a picture you posted a while
back of your Vista desktop clearly showed a shortcut to a program called,
"Hide My ISP" ?

Not being "snarky", but everytime you complain about anonymity I think of
that image and program.

Eisboch

So?

What's that got to do with my desire to end anonymous usenet posting?
Ending anonymous posting would make this a far more pleasant place, though
I'd bet real money at about a dozen of the snarkiest posters here would
find another hobby.

This is not a smart ass question. Do you have a listed telephone number? If
not, why not?


I'm sorry, but I cannot divulge that sort of information, but I am more
than willing to criticize your choices, no matter what they are. If I
don't know anything about your choices, I'll look up criticisms on the
net and post those here, to make it look as if I know something.

Oh..wait...someone here already does that!

One small step for mankind...
 

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:23 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Posted on Thu, Mar. 06, 2008
Anonymous Web postings targeted
BILL WOULD REQUIRE NAMES, ADDRESSES
By John Cheves

A bill filed in the House would keep Kentuckians from posting
anonymous
comments to Web sites.
House Bill 775, filed Tuesday by Rep. Tim Couch, R-Hyden, would
require
anyone who contributes to a Web site to register a real name, address
and e-mail address with that Web site. The person's full name then
would
be used whenever he or she posted a comment.
Web site operators who violate the disclosure law would be fined $500
for a first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense.
Couch readily acknowledged on Wednesday that his bill raises First
Amendment issues regarding free speech, so he won't be pushing it.
But
he wanted to call attention to the phenomenon of unkind and often
untrue
comments about people being posted online by Kentuckians hiding
behind
the cloak of anonymity.
"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my
district,
usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too."
"When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about
someone,
and nobody knows who you are," he said.
Couch said he, too, has been the subject of anonymous online
roasting,
and while he doesn't enjoy it, he doesn't think there's much the
legislature can do about it.
"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its
own. It's
a machine that's going to go its own way," Couch said. "The state can
try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do
anything."
- - -
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's a
start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full, real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.
Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.
Harry,
Beside you telling us your name is Harry Krause, you are just as
anonymous as "Reggie". No one really knows which Harry Krause you are,
there are many in the US and what your home address and phone number is.
We really don't know for certain if your name really is Harry Krause,
or it is just a UseNet persona. If everyone had to submit to a
background check, and all of the information was in the public domain,
what would you do differently when communicating with someone in
UseNet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I know who he is, and could call him right now or send him a letter,
directly to his house... Just for the record...

PS - But if Harry's Law was applied to UseNet, Harry would have to let
everyone know that information, including the guy from Thailand living
in Canada, who took offense to Harry saying he was having incest with
his underage sister and pimping his underage sister. I think the guy
said he wanted to walk up to Harry's door late at night and have him say
that to his face, or something to that effect.

Now that would not be prudent.




If Harry's law applied to usenet, you wouldn't be here.

One small step for mankind...
 

On Mar 10, 7:15*pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:23 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Posted on Thu, Mar. 06, 2008
Anonymous Web postings targeted
BILL WOULD REQUIRE NAMES, ADDRESSES
By John Cheves

A bill filed in the House would keep Kentuckians from posting anonymous
comments to Web sites.
House Bill 775, filed Tuesday by Rep. Tim Couch, R-Hyden, would require
anyone who contributes to a Web site to register a real name, address
and e-mail address with that Web site. The person's full name then would
be used whenever he or she posted a comment.
Web site operators who violate the disclosure law would be fined $500
for a first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense.
Couch readily acknowledged on Wednesday that his bill raises First
Amendment issues regarding free speech, so he won't be pushing it. But
he wanted to call attention to the phenomenon of unkind and often untrue
comments about people being posted online by Kentuckians hiding behind
the cloak of anonymity.
"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my district,
usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too."
"When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about someone,
and nobody knows who you are," he said.
Couch said he, too, has been the subject of anonymous online roasting,
and while he doesn't enjoy it, he doesn't think there's much the
legislature can do about it.
"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its own. It's
a machine that's going to go its own way," Couch said. "The state can
try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do anything."
- - -
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's a start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full, real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.
Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.
Harry,
Beside you telling us your name is Harry Krause, you are just as
anonymous as "Reggie". *No one really knows which Harry Krause you are,
there are many in the US and what your home address and phone number is..
* We really don't know for certain if your name really is Harry Krause,
or it is just a UseNet persona. *If everyone had to submit to a
background check, and all of the information was in the public domain,
what would you do differently when communicating with someone in UseNet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I know who he is, and could call him right now or send him a letter,
directly to his house... Just for the record...

PS - But if Harry's Law was applied to UseNet, Harry would have to let
everyone know that information, including the guy from Thailand living
in Canada, who took offense to Harry saying he was having incest with
his underage sister and pimping his underage sister. *I think the guy
said he wanted to walk up to Harry's door late at night and have him say
that to his face, or something to that effect.

Now that would not be prudent.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are correct in that accountability would certainly change the
internet.. An area it would really help in is copyright infringement.
On the other hand, like gun control, only the crims would remain
hidden..

One small step for mankind...
 

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:23 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Posted on Thu, Mar. 06, 2008
Anonymous Web postings targeted
BILL WOULD REQUIRE NAMES, ADDRESSES
By John Cheves

A bill filed in the House would keep Kentuckians from posting
anonymous
comments to Web sites.
House Bill 775, filed Tuesday by Rep. Tim Couch, R-Hyden, would
require
anyone who contributes to a Web site to register a real name,
address
and e-mail address with that Web site. The person's full name
then would
be used whenever he or she posted a comment.
Web site operators who violate the disclosure law would be fined
$500
for a first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense.
Couch readily acknowledged on Wednesday that his bill raises First
Amendment issues regarding free speech, so he won't be pushing
it. But
he wanted to call attention to the phenomenon of unkind and often
untrue
comments about people being posted online by Kentuckians hiding
behind
the cloak of anonymity.
"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my
district,
usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too."
"When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about
someone,
and nobody knows who you are," he said.
Couch said he, too, has been the subject of anonymous online
roasting,
and while he doesn't enjoy it, he doesn't think there's much the
legislature can do about it.
"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its
own. It's
a machine that's going to go its own way," Couch said. "The state
can
try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do
anything."
- - -
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's a
start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full, real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a
political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.
Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.
Harry,
Beside you telling us your name is Harry Krause, you are just as
anonymous as "Reggie". No one really knows which Harry Krause you are,
there are many in the US and what your home address and phone number
is.
We really don't know for certain if your name really is Harry Krause,
or it is just a UseNet persona. If everyone had to submit to a
background check, and all of the information was in the public domain,
what would you do differently when communicating with someone in
UseNet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I know who he is, and could call him right now or send him a letter,
directly to his house... Just for the record...

PS - But if Harry's Law was applied to UseNet, Harry would have to let
everyone know that information, including the guy from Thailand living
in Canada, who took offense to Harry saying he was having incest with
his underage sister and pimping his underage sister. I think the guy
said he wanted to walk up to Harry's door late at night and have him
say that to his face, or something to that effect.

Now that would not be prudent.




If Harry's law applied to usenet, you wouldn't be here.

Yes, but you would not be here either, since I don't know which Harry
Krause you are, if you really are named Harry Krause. In fact, very few
if anyone who currently posts in rec.boats would be here

One small step for mankind...
 

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:23 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Posted on Thu, Mar. 06, 2008
Anonymous Web postings targeted
BILL WOULD REQUIRE NAMES, ADDRESSES
By John Cheves

A bill filed in the House would keep Kentuckians from posting
anonymous
comments to Web sites.
House Bill 775, filed Tuesday by Rep. Tim Couch, R-Hyden, would
require
anyone who contributes to a Web site to register a real name,
address
and e-mail address with that Web site. The person's full name
then would
be used whenever he or she posted a comment.
Web site operators who violate the disclosure law would be fined
$500
for a first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense.
Couch readily acknowledged on Wednesday that his bill raises First
Amendment issues regarding free speech, so he won't be pushing
it. But
he wanted to call attention to the phenomenon of unkind and
often untrue
comments about people being posted online by Kentuckians hiding
behind
the cloak of anonymity.
"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my
district,
usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too."
"When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about
someone,
and nobody knows who you are," he said.
Couch said he, too, has been the subject of anonymous online
roasting,
and while he doesn't enjoy it, he doesn't think there's much the
legislature can do about it.
"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its
own. It's
a machine that's going to go its own way," Couch said. "The
state can
try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do
anything."
- - -
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's
a start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full,
real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a
political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.
Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.
Harry,
Beside you telling us your name is Harry Krause, you are just as
anonymous as "Reggie". No one really knows which Harry Krause you
are,
there are many in the US and what your home address and phone
number is.
We really don't know for certain if your name really is Harry
Krause,
or it is just a UseNet persona. If everyone had to submit to a
background check, and all of the information was in the public domain,
what would you do differently when communicating with someone in
UseNet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I know who he is, and could call him right now or send him a letter,
directly to his house... Just for the record...

PS - But if Harry's Law was applied to UseNet, Harry would have to
let everyone know that information, including the guy from Thailand
living in Canada, who took offense to Harry saying he was having
incest with his underage sister and pimping his underage sister. I
think the guy said he wanted to walk up to Harry's door late at night
and have him say that to his face, or something to that effect.

Now that would not be prudent.




If Harry's law applied to usenet, you wouldn't be here.

Yes, but you would not be here either, since I don't know which Harry
Krause you are, if you really are named Harry Krause. In fact, very few
if anyone who currently posts in rec.boats would be here


Oh, I'd be here, and so would lots of others. It would be a much
friendlier place, without posters whose only reason for being here was
to act snarky, or to criticize the boating decisions of others, without
revealing the decisions they made.

One small step for mankind...
 

JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:23 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Posted on Thu, Mar. 06, 2008
Anonymous Web postings targeted
BILL WOULD REQUIRE NAMES, ADDRESSES
By John Cheves

A bill filed in the House would keep Kentuckians from posting
anonymous
comments to Web sites.
House Bill 775, filed Tuesday by Rep. Tim Couch, R-Hyden, would
require
anyone who contributes to a Web site to register a real name, address
and e-mail address with that Web site. The person's full name then
would
be used whenever he or she posted a comment.
Web site operators who violate the disclosure law would be fined $500
for a first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense.
Couch readily acknowledged on Wednesday that his bill raises First
Amendment issues regarding free speech, so he won't be pushing it.
But
he wanted to call attention to the phenomenon of unkind and often
untrue
comments about people being posted online by Kentuckians hiding
behind
the cloak of anonymity.
"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my
district,
usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too."
"When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about
someone,
and nobody knows who you are," he said.
Couch said he, too, has been the subject of anonymous online
roasting,
and while he doesn't enjoy it, he doesn't think there's much the
legislature can do about it.
"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its own.
It's
a machine that's going to go its own way," Couch said. "The state can
try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do
anything."
- - -
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's a
start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full, real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.
Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.
Harry,
Beside you telling us your name is Harry Krause, you are just as
anonymous as "Reggie". No one really knows which Harry Krause you are,
there are many in the US and what your home address and phone number is.
We really don't know for certain if your name really is Harry Krause,
or it is just a UseNet persona. If everyone had to submit to a
background check, and all of the information was in the public domain,
what would you do differently when communicating with someone in
UseNet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
I know who he is, and could call him right now or send him a letter,
directly to his house... Just for the record...
Yes, but how do I know you are not lying to me? ;)


Reginald P. Smithers obviously does not want to change the tone of this NG
and continues with his nasty ways. Surprised?



I am not certain, but i don't think Just took any offense to my
statement. I think he took it as a friendly joke. I am glad to see
you are interested in a new improved NG and are making a positive
contribution to that objective.

One small step for mankind...
 

JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
. ..
JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:23 pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:12 pm, HK wrote:
Posted on Thu, Mar. 06, 2008
Anonymous Web postings targeted
BILL WOULD REQUIRE NAMES, ADDRESSES
By John Cheves

A bill filed in the House would keep Kentuckians from posting
anonymous
comments to Web sites.
House Bill 775, filed Tuesday by Rep. Tim Couch, R-Hyden, would
require
anyone who contributes to a Web site to register a real name,
address
and e-mail address with that Web site. The person's full name then
would
be used whenever he or she posted a comment.
Web site operators who violate the disclosure law would be fined
$500
for a first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense.
Couch readily acknowledged on Wednesday that his bill raises First
Amendment issues regarding free speech, so he won't be pushing it.
But
he wanted to call attention to the phenomenon of unkind and often
untrue
comments about people being posted online by Kentuckians hiding
behind
the cloak of anonymity.
"Some nasty things have been said about high school kids in my
district,
usually by other kids," Couch said. "The adults get in on it, too."
"When you're anonymous, you can say anything you want to about
someone,
and nobody knows who you are," he said.
Couch said he, too, has been the subject of anonymous online
roasting,
and while he doesn't enjoy it, he doesn't think there's much the
legislature can do about it.
"I think right now (online posting) is pretty much just on its own.
It's
a machine that's going to go its own way," Couch said. "The state
can
try to pass some rules, but I don't really think it would do
anything."
- - -
Not quite my idea for shedding the cloak of anonymity, but it's a
start.
I'd love to see usenet require posters to post with their full,
real
name and real ISP.
Could get costly. As a web hosting provider I would be looking for a
software package that would block all ip's from that state to any
access to my systems, just like Indonesia and China. It is a
political
ploy anyway, someone looking for votes.
Well, I think getting rid of usenet anonymity is a great idea.
Harry,
Beside you telling us your name is Harry Krause, you are just as
anonymous as "Reggie". No one really knows which Harry Krause you
are,
there are many in the US and what your home address and phone number
is.
We really don't know for certain if your name really is Harry
Krause,
or it is just a UseNet persona. If everyone had to submit to a
background check, and all of the information was in the public domain,
what would you do differently when communicating with someone in
UseNet?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
I know who he is, and could call him right now or send him a letter,
directly to his house... Just for the record...
Yes, but how do I know you are not lying to me? ;)

Reginald P. Smithers obviously does not want to change the tone of this
NG and continues with his nasty ways. Surprised?
I am not certain, but i don't think Just took any offense to my statement.
I think he took it as a friendly joke. I am glad to see you are
interested in a new improved NG and are making a positive contribution to
that objective.




Explain it any way you want...........YOU continue with your negative
behavior here. Your posts to this thread and many others prove that.

Folks here want a change.

Change your behavior or leave.

Got it?



When someone makes such a friendly suggestion as this, it is hard not to
say yes.