At least a quarter of the last postings here do not follow the usenet convention of proper identifying the author---which is the full name of the author and a valid email adress of the author.

I wonder whether those who set themself apart by breaking existing convention would appreciate to be set apart, when others too break convention.

-manfred

Manfred Nowak Wrote:

> At least a quarter of the last postings here do not follow the usenet convention of proper identifying the author---which is the full name of the author and a valid email adress of the author.

What is usenet?

On Thu, 28 May 2009 14:15:48 +0400, Kagamin <spam@here.lot> wrote:

> Manfred Nowak Wrote:
>
>> At least a quarter of the last postings here do not follow the usenet convention of proper identifying the author---which is the full name of the author and a valid email adress of the author.
>
> What is usenet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

Manfred Nowak wrote:
> At least a quarter of the last postings here do not follow the usenet convention of proper identifying the author---which is the full name of the author and a valid email adress of the author.
> 
> I wonder whether those who set themself apart by breaking existing convention would appreciate to be set apart, when others too break convention.
> 
> -manfred

No. There's no reason to require or even incentivize non-anonymity.

Denis Koroskin Wrote:

> On Thu, 28 May 2009 14:15:48 +0400, Kagamin <spam@here.lot> wrote:
> 
> > Manfred Nowak Wrote:
> >
> >> At least a quarter of the last postings here do not follow the usenet convention of proper identifying the author---which is the full name of the author and a valid email adress of the author.
> >
> > What is usenet?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

yet another board system...

On Thu, 28 May 2009 15:02:04 +0400, Kagamin <spam@here.lot> wrote:

> Denis Koroskin Wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 28 May 2009 14:15:48 +0400, Kagamin <spam@here.lot> wrote:
>>
>> > Manfred Nowak Wrote:
>> >
>> >> At least a quarter of the last postings here do not follow the usenet convention of proper identifying the author---which is the full name
>> of
>> >> the author and a valid email adress of the author.
>> >
>> > What is usenet?
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
>
> yet another board system...

FWIW, NNTP (which is used in newsgroups like this) falls into Usenet category:

Wikipedia quote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#Technical_details):
> On the Internet, Usenet is typically served via NNTP ...

Manfred Nowak wrote:
> At least a quarter of the last postings here do not follow the usenet convention of proper identifying the author---which is the full name of the author and a valid email adress of the author.
> 
> I wonder whether those who set themself apart by breaking existing convention would appreciate to be set apart, when others too break convention.
> 
> -manfred


There are many reasons for encouraging, or even enforcing, non-anonymity on a forum. Some of them are good. Ancient Convention is -- no offense -- not one of them. :)

This NG is not plagued by spam, trolls or hit'n'runs, so I see no reason to require non-anonymity.

But who knows, maybe acts of terrorism are being planned inbetween lines of D code in this very forum? (Oh no, did I just bring us to the Attention of the Authorities?)

-Lars

Denis Koroskin wrote:
> FWIW, NNTP (which is used in newsgroups like this) falls into Usenet category:
> 
> Wikipedia quote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#Technical_details):
>> On the Internet, Usenet is typically served via NNTP ...

Just because NNTP is used for Usenet doesn't mean every NNTP server is a Usenet server.
Similarly, not every TCP/IP network is the Internet and not every car is the one I drove to the supermarket last week :P.

"Frits van Bommel" <fvbommel@REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> wrote in message news:gvlsjc$1881$1@digitalmars.com...
> Denis Koroskin wrote:
>> FWIW, NNTP (which is used in newsgroups like this) falls into Usenet category:
>>
>> Wikipedia quote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#Technical_details):
>>> On the Internet, Usenet is typically served via NNTP ...
>
> Just because NNTP is used for Usenet doesn't mean every NNTP server is a
> Usenet server.
> Similarly, not every TCP/IP network is the Internet and not every car is
> the one I drove to the supermarket last week :P.

"WiFi available here!" [pet peeve]Not every WiFi network is conected to the internet[/pet peeve]

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Frits van Bommel" <fvbommel@REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> wrote in message news:gvlsjc$1881$1@digitalmars.com...
>> Denis Koroskin wrote:
>>> FWIW, NNTP (which is used in newsgroups like this) falls into Usenet category:
>>>
>>> Wikipedia quote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet#Technical_details):
>>>> On the Internet, Usenet is typically served via NNTP ...
>> Just because NNTP is used for Usenet doesn't mean every NNTP server is a Usenet server.
>> Similarly, not every TCP/IP network is the Internet and not every car is the one I drove to the supermarket last week :P.
> 
> "WiFi available here!" [pet peeve]Not every WiFi network is conected to the internet[/pet peeve] 

One day I would like to walk into a coffee shop my laptop, connect to Wi-Fi and be able to only explore the cafe's intranet.