On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Cat Okita wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Alex Pilosov wrote: > > MLC suggests to change the AUP to: > > > > 7. Postings to the list must be made using real, identifiable first and > > last names, rather than aliases. > > > > I'd like community feedback on this. > > I (still) think that this is bollocks. What matters isn't "real, > identifiable first and last names", but "a consistent identifier associated > with consistent behaviour over time". Well - how would we phrase a policy which would prohibit obvious things like n3td3v while allowing aleph1 and others previously mentioned?
> Do I care who Aleph1[0] really is? Nope. Do I care that Aleph1 has a > consistent pattern of behaviour, and can be reliably found as such? Yes. > > Beyond that - how do you decided what a "real, identifiable first and > last name" is? Are we using baby name books? Is "Moonunit Zappa" any > more (or less) valid than "John Smith" or "Fook Yu" ? I understand the dilemma just as well. Problem is, if MLC says "you can't use this alias but $person can" - we'll be accused of being infair. So its either * permit all aliases, * permit aliases that are in MLC's judgement sufficiently established and identifiable, * deny all aliases Any other suggestions how to make a decision whether alias is OK without ...well, MLC having to make a judgement? :) Possibly, just permitting all aliases and judging based on the content of contribution is a better way? If someone contributes, does it really matter it is an alias? If someone is trolling, does it matter they use their real name? -alex
