[2570] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: access to world.std.com from the Univ of Michigan
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Ragland)
Mon Mar 16 21:44:21 1992
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 92 21:41:24 -0500
From: Joe Ragland <jrr@concert.net>
To: bzs@world.std.com
Cc: SEAN@SDG.DRA.COM, alison@oar.net, com-priv@psi.com
> I am confused. Your standard seems to be what you personally seem to
> find valuable, and to extrapolate that to a generality. I am glad your
> needs are so modest.
>
> One specific point:
>
> >> 6. We will carry anonymous (to the public) accounts where many sites
> >> will not. For example, a person who wishes to be involved in a gay
> >> discussion group but would rather not be associated with that activity
> >> to his or her co-workers. We can and certainly do support that type of
> >> access so long as it is done responsibly.
> >
> >Neither do we apply any restraints as long as it's legal.
>
> You are saying that if a provost or VP, eg, walked into your office in
> a huff and wanted to know who XYZ user on your system is you would
> tell him or her you cannot or will not divulge that information? (I am
> a little bit confused as to what set of people you are speaking for.)
>
> I would find that nearly unique.
>
> Nothing short of a proper court-order can get that information out of
> us. That perhaps is a matter of trust. But that's somewhat better in
> this case than interested politics with one's own employer pitted
> against the person holding the information.
>
> Perhaps you doubt that, but remember, in such a matter we have no
> particular interest, your boss can't fire me. Saying "no" is of
> generally little consequence. I've done it before.
>
> Better, why would your boss be interested in someone using my system
> or even expect to be given their identity by me? The question doesn't
> even come up in the first place.
I was just agreeing with you. Maybe it's my lack of a Boston accent...:-)
--joe
