Re: More thoughts on From: lines

[robyn <noise@noisebox.cypherpunks.to>]

Here's my user sanity check on From lines:

I think the best option is for From lines to be a hybrid between "Subject" 
(fully customizable by the user) and "Date" (not).

Reason:

[insert entire evolution of Nomen Nesco, An Matet, et. al here]

I've done this myself, multiple times... "Oh, it's going to usenet, I'll 
just make the exit hop random."  "Oh, it's going to some HR Person, I'll 
use the one that looks most human."

I guess a lot of this depends on what exit nodes' exit email address and
default usernames actually ARE, but from a user standpoint, if some
remailers have cool exit email addresses (juicy@) and some don't
(anonymous@) I will almost always pick juicy, if allowed.  Likewise, if
I'm stuck with whatever@ (because the spec requires ALL exit hops to be
named something@), but some remailers let me be "Joe Blow anonymous@"
instead of "Anonymous Email Sender anonymous@" I can tell you which exit
node I'll be picking, and which exit node probably 50% of the userbase
will use.

I agree that fully customizable From lines are a bad idea, but if we're
going to force From EMAILADDRESSES to be all the same (and I don't see
why, but agree that EMAILADDRESS should not be user changeable) then I
would STRONGLY suggest we allow From NAMES to be "customizable." (Or come
up with some other way to help users mute the "anonymity" of what people
will see when scrolling through their inbox list... either by adopting a
set, but "normal" From line, or something along those lines.)

In sum,

1. Users changing "Anonymous Bastard <anon@abc.com>" to "President 
<president@whitehouse.gov" should NOT be allowed.

2. Users changing "Anonymous Bastard <anon@abc.com>" to "Bob Jones 
<anon@abc.>" should potentially be allowed.

3. Adopting a sane naming convention for exit nodes (encouraging operators 
to pick "An Metet <anm@abc.com>" over "Anonymous Bastards 
<thisisananonymousperson@abc.com>" should be STRONGLY encouraged.

The obvious problem with 2 is "people should just get nyms" but 2 does 
help in case all operators are lame and say things like "it should be 
REALLY obvious that this account is anonymous, so ill do everything i can 
in the from line to make sure no one thinks otherwise."

Any other suggestions?  

If 2, or something like it is not included in the spec, I hereby state
that my next remailer will be run from the account "Janet McWilliams
<jmcwill@noisebox...> which will rapidly create a loyalty set and a divide
among users who will want to be "janet" all the time in lieu of
"anonymous."[1]

-- noise

[1] Even if reply blocks are easy to use, I anticipate a large number of 
users who will never use them, or simply not want to bother with them, 
which is why "Well if you want to be Janet then make a nym" is IMO not a 
valid argument and missing a fairly large point.

-------------------------------------- noise@noisebox.cypherpunks.to --
"Don't line up for the boxcars yourself.  At least make them come knock 
 on your door.  Maybe they'll forget to do so." -- D. Frissell 06.03.99