[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Scarce Resources In Global Name Space
- To: <hallway>, <marcs>
- Subject: Re: Scarce Resources In Global Name Space
- From: Michael McClary <michael>
- Date: Mon, 8 May 89 13:11:58 PDT
I am STRONGLY opposed to reassinging any mail address that has been
allocated and USED, until after it has been:
- Forwarded until it has had no traffic for several months, then
- Disconnected and idled until it has had no traffic for several
I objected mildly when Sue first brought this up with me, because I
thought at that time that "dan" was very recently assigned, and had
not come into heavy use. I now find this is not the case.
I would not object to offering victims of first-name-collisions-with-
new-employees the choice between signing a non-disclosure agreement
and chosing an off-the-beaten-name-space replacement.
I started to compose the reasons for my objections, but realized I
was taking too much time. A few high points, though:
- I've been on both sides of this problem (as a mail administrator)
so I'm not talking PURE ivory-tower.
- Even a landlord who evicts a tennant has no right to read or
discard first-class mail that arrives in the apartment's box.
- The "tragedy of the commons" is the distributed inconvenience
to the senders.
- The correct analogy is homesteading, where a person may only
claim the land he actually puts to use.
Please note that I'm not claiming we can't reassign names arbitrarily.
It's just a REAL BAD idea. This is the giant, economy sized, can of
The homestead approach was developed in the commercial environment,
which is not noted for altruism toward ex-employees. Xanadu and
Amix, because of the nature of their business, must additionially
develop a reputation for care with other people's information.
More by voice, if appropriate.