RE: Should the _Times_ be anonymous?
Tue, 23 Aug 1994 20:12:22 +0100

I think there is definitely a need to be able to authenticate postings to
the _Times_. I don't however think this should be compulsory as anonymous
messages do have their uses. However a message needs some sort of
authentication if its readers are to take it seriously.

Some people have suggested that a mechanism exists in that you can just
sign your message. This while true is slightly limiting. A forged signature
on a message can do a lot of damage in the week it takes someone to disown
the message. An automatic authentication mechanism would mean readers would
know immediately that the message came from the person claiming to have
sent it.

People should also be encouraged to use the authentication mechanism. If
there is no encouragement to use it then most people will continue to post
their rubbish anonymously. I think reducing the payout for anonymous
postings will nicely encourage authentication.

As to the mechanism. Either the password protected credit line or doing it
within your orders seem equally good to me. However I believe it is
important that it should be the faction that is identified. The faction is
the only entity that can be positively tagged as belonging to an individual
player. Authenticating an article as having come from a unit, where that
unit has never been seen or linked to a particular faction, is virtually
then same as an anonymous posting and will be used as such. If that is all
that will be down then it will be a waste of effort.


Ross Inglis ! Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, ! I do not speak for my employer.

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links