> > > >I won't pretend to hold any influence in this project, but from my
> > > >experience, an email address is more 'real' online than a name. As
> > > >people have said, a name can be faked. An email address is
> > > >functional, and so, is much more likely to be accurate.
> > >
> > > ...and should there be some catastrophic legal horror ...I'm sure
> > > IP's will be reversed, ISP's contacted and 5am raids organised.
> >
> >Sure... and may I ask how you expect they will not do the same to
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >--tim
>
> If I were involvred in the code which was the subject to a
> "catastrophic legal horror" or even, for that, if I were involved
> with the code ...then I am sure they WOULD!
>
> <confused>
>
> BC
Just pointing out that information already available in the mailing
list logs can and does point to each and every developer. The patch
came from an email address... that's enough (under all but the most
extreme cases) to hold someone legally accountable. So why resist
identification by email (which you have to use anyway to send in
patches), and alternatively, why require anything more than email when
it does the job better than anything short of picture IDs verified in
person?
--tim
Sorry tim, I am still confused.
# I* am very much NOT a developer for this project, due to the
seperation of my online and real-life nomenclature.
(although technically, several of my "real-life" friends call me
"chip" or "bluey" or similar)
(in the name of pedancy, I am not a developer at all, I am a programmer)
# Patches are not submitted by email, but via sourceforge.
Although I* use the same nickname everywhere on the internet.
Bar one really obscure exception which was requested of me to protect
the anonimity of others.
# I* do not resist identification via my email address.
I'm not actually sure it would be possible - my* IP address is all
over the shop.
*in fairness, I'm not sure whether your comment is directed to me
personally or just a general comment
BC
