Spam & denial of service are known issues that persist in networks. It makes sense to develop public manifestations of spam filters & network throttling policies that inform network users, while not claiming that the public manifestations are necessarily the complete story.

Auto completion of forms for shopping & other similar activities is a convenience that can also create risks. Client applications should give users tools for intelligent control of these convenience vs. risk tradeoffs.

Our public concept of anonymous communications arose in the context of the Deep State scam world where nothing is anonymous or private in covert reality. Certainly, anonymity is hard to achieve in today’s world. Rather than pretend to support it, network & social ids should adopt policies of cooperating with anonimity broker portals that take extra care to mitigate anon risks in both directions for network activities – e.g. avoiding timing attacks, supplemental tags/headers, standard routing, etc.

The ideas sketched here are partly motivated by a need/desire to support “personal body oriented (IC)” communications that make human operator assistance an extra level of support/luxury/service rather than any sort of requirement for basic P2P & P2org comms. This makes the system more available & egalitarian & resistant to totalitarian forms of control, while not doing anything to limit the ability to contract for extra operator or directory service support.

A special type of anon service to consider:

Forum for forwarding informative news & political or critical opinion that attempts to shield the identities & particular contributions of contributors to avoid military mafia reprisals.

Org declares that it supports the views of people who fear covert asssault by military/NatSec/police linked agents

Org has an editorial staff with unpublished form & structure that looks at submitted content & contributes to editorial/exec decisions about what to edit & what to forward.

User submissions complete forms that say whether they are willing to be contacted for followup questions (how?) and what set of conditions they place usage. The staff declares that meeting conditions is legally done on a best effort basis of good faith, and not subject to copyright claims by the submitter. The submission gets a case number that can be used to lookup what set if any of forwards were affected by the submission (might not be textual match). The org acts as a publisher for its own submissions to other outlets, agreeing to various conditions of delay or withdrawal to private viewing if the outlet agrees to public/review in a timely manner.