In message <60cf421.bf1cb7eb.16330114...@gmx.ch>, Tobi <jahli...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>I don't want to defend whois hiding but you forget to mention that this does >not only help criminals to hide but also protects (a bit at least) the >privacy of the wast majority of "uncriminal" normal users. So the question is >to "forbid" something just because it can also be abused by criminal people > which probably are not the majority of affected people at all... I don't like to participate in this mailing list anymore, because it is largely if not entirely a waste of time. But I can't help responding to the above. The rationale put forward here for why "honest citizens" should be able to do some particular thing... in this case hide their WHOIS details... is identical to the rational used, here in my own home country (U.S.A.) by an organization known as the National Rifle Association (NRA) for why "honest citizens" should have no restrictions whatsoever placed on their ability to purchase all manner of firearms. Anyone who is not aware of how well THAT has worked out needs to pay a bit more attention to the constant stream of news from over on this side of the pond. Regards, rfg P.S. I am ceaselessly amazed and befuddled at the way certain profoundly idiotic concepts seem to take root in societies, and then grow and spread, until, in some cases, they even become the predominant viewpoint, even as virtually no one within the relevant societies ever seems to question any of the underlying assumptions. (See also: Religion.) One quintessential example of this specific type of mass delusion, which has apparently taken root and festered, particularly in Europe, is the apparently widespread belief/theory/notion that in the modern world it is no longer even possible for any person or organization to meaningfully participate in modern life or society without having his/her/its very own domain name or IP address block, and that thus (as the demented reasoning goes) we all absolutely MUST allow any and all persons and/or entities that might, in theory, suffer some backlash (aka "accountability") arising from the public exposure of their thoughts, beliefs, or lifestyles to possess domain names and IP addresses anonymously. The self-evident illogic of such a view is almost so obvious as to not even require explicit statement. Even ignoring the innumerable -other- outlets and venues for unpopular viewpoints that are readily available to anyone able to access the modern internet... outlets and venues that do not require the participant to have his or her own domain name or IP address block... there still remains the inescapable (and inconvenient) truth that even many well known persons holding distinctly unpopular viewpoints (see: Milo Yiannopoulos) seem to have no trouble at all -openly- owning their own Internet resources, e.g. domain names. Regardless of these easily obtainable facts, these days anyone publically expressing the veiwpoint that WHOIS data should be neither cloaked nor hidden is instantly labeled (by the "privacy" advocates) as a homophobe, a racist, or an anti-anti-neo-Nazi, because after all, how else could anyone possibly be against the notion of pervasive and universal unaccountability? This is the exact same underhanded and dishonest retorical tactic used in my country (USA) against anyone who isn't in favor of open borders and unlimited immigration. By definition, it is argued, we must all be racists. I will just close by suggesting to all of the so-called "privacy advocates", in Europe and beyond, that you all should henceforth and immediately paint over your car license plates, so as to make them unreadable, and henceforth attend all public meetings of any kind wearing a balaclava. Because after all, privacy. If it's good enough for the Russian mercenaries in Eastern Ukraine, then it should be standard practice for everyone else in Europe too.
