Re: Scarce Resources In Global Name Space

[Michael McClary <michael>]

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
   more months.

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
worms.

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.
	michael