X-Message-Number: 2455 Date: Sat, 13 Nov 93 12:03:06 GMT From: (Steve Jackson) Subject: CRYONICS Re: Identity and the internet If, as Perry says, "one should be paying attention to what people say, and not who says things," why does he bother informing us that many critics of the original writer have called him insane? The fact is, the reputation of a person providing information is an important component of the information. Not all claims have equal weight. In the real world, everyone past the age of about two is aware of this; it's an automatic part of human information processing and decision making. It's a shame that some of the Cypherpunks have adopted a doctrine that denies this, because (a) it baldly contradicts another of their doctrines, the need to be able to develop a 'reputation' for a pseudonym, and (b) many people see one silly Cypherpunk assertion and assume that the whole movement is irrational - which is not true. It was very instructive to note the way the 'reputation' process worked on this list. Many of 'Clarissa's' original supporters advocated that we give weight to 'her' opinion, just because they agreed with it . . . 'Pay attention to what people say,' they said, 'and judge by counting noses, and here's one more nose.' Later, as 'she' continued her postings and the tenor of 'her' advocacy became more clear, 'she' was repudiated by some prominent list members who had originally supported 'her.' In fact, 'she' had gone from true anonymity, to the status of a recognized pseudonymy with a reputation, and members of the list began to interpret 'her' new postings in light of the body of preceding postings . . . that is, her reputation. We may disagree on the way this kind of situation should be dealt with, but few will argue that incidents like this will become common as the Net becomes more important in our daily life and business. I think the Cypherpunks are performing an important service in keeping the issue in debate, even if I don't buy all their dogma! Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=2455