Anonymous writes: > You'd think the one area where there would be a market for > reasonably good untraceability is online discussion boards, > particularly the financial forums. Every week there is an article > about another company suing its online critics. And so far the > yahoos and aols have just rolled over and provided the real > identities behind the flimsy protection of nicknames. ZKS nyms may be value for money as legal insurance alone :-) The value for money depends upon the probability of being sued, and the cost of defence if one is sued, compared to the cost of the insurance ($50/year). The probability of being sued depends on the poster, and the forums. What does it cost these days in the US to defend oneself against a bullshit defamation suit? > A good quality anonymous message board would be highly attractive. What do you need specialised message boards for? Just use the existing message boards anonymously. (Are yahoo et al asking for strong proof of identity?) It's more useful to be able to participate in existing messaging boards, as they have the preexisting critical mass of users. > While we're fantasizing, let's imagine that it uses some kind of > crypto credential system to prevent abuse. Is this feasible? I'm not personally sure that abuse prevention is a big deal. What does abuse mean in an online discussion forum? Surely all these forums already deal with "abuse" -- some delete messages as they see fit, or ignore it if they want to avoid the risk of being seen as editing the material and losing common carrier status, or only remove messages upon receipt of a court order from a court they recognise. Ecash might be nice to stop volume type abuses (post too much, and fill up the discussion forum). Distributing ratings such as NoCEm [1] are a good way to make it easier to skip junk you aren't interested in. Adam [1] NoCeM http://www.cm.org/
