Cathy:

I agree that it is impossible to do complete identity verification. However, something as simple as verifying a credit card or government issued photo ID, for example, would be an improvement. Having those verifications associated with specific IP addresses would then help to ensure the identity of the computer user. Those IP addresses could then be prohibited from accessing areas that are not appropriate for that particular user (i.e. adults accessing areas frequented by minors or minors accessing pornographic areas).

In my conceptualization of implementation of this “system”, this would be the responsibility of the individual webmasters for specific websites (i.e. myspace).

As I previously stated and implied, the ultimate responsibility falls on the parents to teach their children simple, yet important, steps that they can take to protect themselves online. Anything reasonable that can be done to help protect children would be an improvement.

Would this system be fool-proof? No. Would it be better than nothing? Yes.

I do not believe you should have to prove who you are and that is horrible what happened but parents should be able to keep an eye on their childs my space or emails. I believe she should be punished along with her daughter too BUT what is the difference in putting it in my space or walking up to someone and saying it verbally, kids and adults can be cruel and that is ashame.

This case will prove interesting. Why?

Does everyone believe that people should not lie about their identity and that the rules should apply fairly to all? Then if you do, the police should not be able to use fake identities to catch pedophiles either. They will have to state in their MySpace ID and on other sites that they are the police acting as a underage girl and trying to catch pedophiles. I want police to catch these pedophiles, but only if the pedophiles do something wrong.

People on these sites lie much of the time. I’ve seen ID’s where a person says they are from a certain location, but they’re from a different country in some cases.

We would now be saying that a person is responsible for their words, when we should be saying a person is responsible for their actions. If someone calls me a name, can I prosecute them for calling me a bad word and win? Is profanity a crime?

Once again, this is similar to the situation in the 80’s where Ozzy Osbourne’s song “Suicide Solution,” was listened to by a kid in school and the kid later committed suicide. Ozzy was prosecuted and he was found not guilty. People’s emotions are played with all the time, but that’s life, so a person has to deal with letdowns throughout their lives.

There is a freedom of speech as the benefits of having it are greater than the detriments of not having it. The only issue I have is when someone messes with me and I never did anything with them.

I’ve been called names on these posts when I never attacked the other person who attacked me in writing, but they don’t think through what I say and attack me anyway without giving any reason. Can I prosecute them as well and win? If I am wrong, please explain why and don’t attack the person, only attack their view.

I find this entire discussion very sad and a tad paranoid.

To protect children from the 1 in 100 jerk, you deny them the ability to communicate with the 99% of the adult population who are law-abiding, and possible resources for knowledge and enrichment of their lives. For the first 7 years I had a website, I’d get email from kids wanting homework help on the topic of the website. That never happens anymore, because parents have decided all websites are run by horrible people with nefarious ulterior motives. (And yes, my real name and street address is on my website.)

All any ID system will ever be able to prove is who owns the computer. They will never be able to prove who is at the keyboard, without intrusive Orwellian measures being incorporated into computers. So what then? You deny the Internet to people unable to afford the newest high tech? If there is a portal into my home, will not government surveillance be close behind?
This kills a pesky fly with an elephant gun.

The problem isn’t who a person is, or who they aren’t. The problem is how one behaves, and that’s where society is falling down. We no longer teach simple courtesy, and respect for each other. If one has courtesy and respect, communication (either anonymous or signed, and on any topic) isn’t a behaviour problem. An analogy: all drivers theoretically know the rules of the road, but how many people break them with impunity? That’s a problem of ego-centeredness and lack of concern for others, not an expression of “freedom.”

Creating an ID system will just create fake IDs. We can’t even keep 100% of the 17 year olds out of bars, and they are there in person. We need to reinstitute netiquette, and teach it in schools, teaching people to be prudent, but not paranoid in communicating with others.

nathan1174, so you think that every time a new user comes to WikiLou.com I should have to run their credit card or driver’s license number? First of all, people are unwilling to give up that info to random site administrators online. Plus, I have a full time job and a life beyond running a not for profit information website for our area. As of today WikiLou.com has 797 registered users. Do you want to work for me for free to verify every one of them after you convince them to give you their sensitive personal data? Feel free to do so.

Would you like to have to give your credit card info, social security number, driver’s license number, or anything else you’re suggesting every time you post a comment on this site right here? I doubt it.

The idea of this is idiotic. It is impossible to do, let alone enforce. Is the government going to fine me for not knowing who 790 of those 797 users I have are? What would they fine me? $1 each? $10 each? WikiLou is not a money-maker. In fact, I’ve put over $500 into it and not gotten a cent back. I hope people with your type of logic and short-sightedness aren’t making the laws, but I know that is a vain hope…

nathan,…So basically what you’re saying is that ANY technological advancement that comes along isnt my right to use,…its a privlidge? ..I dont agree,…By your thinking ..the government has a right to govern my usage of it before I am able to utilize it …hmmm?
That is EXACTLY the type of flawed thinking that will be the downfall of the bill of rights …you know “life liberty , pursuit of happiness stuff.” or is that all just mumbo jumbo to you? In this country I have a RIGHT to do as I please(within reason of course) So long as abide by the law. Now you want me to declare my name and identity before I do ANYTHING?…yeah right.

People seem to think that publishing or communicating under anonymous conditions originated with the Internet. It originated with the invention of writing, and before that,with the first “go-between” when Caveman A told Caveman B to tell Cavewoman C something and not tell her who said it.

You can throw all the high tech in the world at it, and you cannot fix human nature. We can only do that ourselves.