.ll 72
.fo off
.co on 
.ce ((Editor's comments in double parenthesis - Homer))
.ce ADR - 296
.ce Copyright (C) Homer Wilson Smith
.ce Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes
======================================================================== 76
Date:         Sat, 24 Jun 89 18:10:57 EDT
From:         homer 
Subject:      conceal
To:           adore-l@ualtavm

     Since CONCEAL mode does not change headers for those who
post, those who post in CONCEAL mode are revealed.

     Since people who susbscribe in CONCEAL mode but do not post,
are known at least to the moderator because we get a mail file
from every signon and signoff, it is impossible for someone to
be on the list without ANYONE knowing.  But since they have chosen
CONCEAL mode, the moderator has some ethical compunction to not
reveal them to the list, until they choose to reveal themselves
via a posting.

     Once they have posted, people can find out they are on the
list by wandering through the logs, which is a long job
and not the usual way to find if someone is on the list.

     Thus I am not sure what honest advantage there is to signing on in
CONCEAL mode.  If you don't post, and just listen, then no one
but the moderator will know you are listening in and the moderator
will be under some restraint about mentioning your existance
to the list or any problems he might have with it.

     If you post, you blow your cover to those on the list, but
not to those who signon later or are just wandering around looking
at reviews and things.

     This problem of whether people should be informed of
concealed subscribers should be taken up by other list members.

     Our options are,

     1)  Not allow it.

        How do I deal with people who signon in conceal mode not knowing
        we have made a rule against it?  Make ADORE-L a sub by request
        list, and make them read the disclaimer BEFORE they are let on?

     2)  Allow it, but inform the list that it is happening and who it is.

     3)  Allow it, and inform the list it is happening but not who.

     4)  Not inform the list at all.

     It must be noted that the review output does tell you how many
concealed names there are on a list.  Thus you would know
how many there were if you looked.

     Thus there can not be any problem with informing the list
everytime someone signs on in CONCEAL if there cover is not blown.
Of course that means I have to check the list definition every time
some one signs on, which increases the load on bitnet and my brain.

     Small as it is.

     The worst thing about conceal mode, is it does not allow
the moderator to inform the list of a possible dangerous element in
the midst except to say that some unidentified person has signed on.

     My original posting about Bill Sklar may have been wrong,
it may have jumped the gun, it might also have been right.

     The deeper this thing gets, the less I like him regardless
of any alleged account closing incident, which even if it had not
happened, you would have received a note from me about Sklar the
day he signed on CONCEALED or NOT.  If I had been wary of the
CONCEAL I would have approached it differently but I would have
emphasized how the situation might even be worse BECAUSE of the
CONCEAL and by now the list members would have spoken up
on this conceal matter one way or another.

 homer               adore-l@ualtavm      6/24/89 conceal