[9511] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Advisory Committee E-mail Addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean McLinden)
Fri Jan 7 08:58:51 1994
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 1994 08:42:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Sean McLinden <sean@dsl.pitt.edu>
To: The future Ross Stapleton-Gray <STAPLETON@bpa.arizona.edu>
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <940106212111.20400a9e@BPA.ARIZONA.EDU>
On Thu, 6 Jan 1994, The future Ross Stapleton-Gray wrote:
> E-mail is not paper mail, clearly. The "barrier to entry" for those
> who've got access to the Internet is far lower than for the laborious
> process of crafting an actual letter and waiting the several days for it to
> arrive at its destination.
The difficulty is with the clause "for those who've got access to the
Internet." Specifically, the biggest concern for the future is going to
be what to do about everybody else. For them, the barriers are quite high.
> That said, there's no reason why the Advisory Committee members ought
> not to solicit myriad views electronically. I don't see any reason,
> however, why participation in this advisory committee
> (despite its very special nature with regard to networking and E-mail)
> should require that they surrender their electronic foyer to the mob
> attempting to camp on their virtual doorstep... :-)
I don't think that is the issue. The issue is whether or not people who
do not view electronic commerce as a *essential* tool of their daily life
can appropriately participate in a vision of the future. Many would argue
that to those people, the e-mail address would be more meaningful than
the FAX number, voice number or surface mail address.
In fact, as long as 8 years ago I was sufficiently prejudiced against the
network "wannabies" that, as a purchaser of systems, I refused to contact
vendors that didn't list their e-mail address on their business card.
Of course, this is all water over the dam at this point, but it seems
like for some "walking the talk" has meaning.
Sean
