Trust me, you don't want to do this. The last time I did it I ran into a nasty bug (grad student, remember? Bug free hardly likely) so, sorry for only three sexes now, even if I did get rid of Gharlane.

I'm not doing that again until I'm sure my part of the universe is unpageable. Who knows what other horrors lurk in the untested recesses of the garbage collector?

Users were permitted to choose their own password. These passwords could be long. We had guidelines as to what were good schemes, but there was no enforcement of rules.

However, we also

1. ran a quick check on your password against a cracker and
2. ran a password cracker as a constant background job.

If your password was cracked by the quick checker, it was rejected and you had to choose another.

If the background checker cracked your password, you were locked out. When you tried to log on and couldn't, and called to find out why, you were told your password had been cracked and you needed a new one. (Actually, I think we emailed you then locked you out, so if you were on-line, you could choose a new password then and there).

It worked.

As Derek & Clive demonstrated, merely reeling off a string of swear words just blunts their effect. In the case of MightyMartian, his invective evidently did cause some other people to listen to what he had to say, and so was effective.

Personally, I tend to follow your approach: If I'm trying to persuade, then alienating your opposition is counterproductive. Nevertheless, I will try to see past the surface. Just because I don't like someone or what they have to say doesn't mean they might not be right.

The more important thing is argument vs bluster. MightyMartian's posts are at least amusing, as well as having some content, and I find them less offensive than some others here.

You won't pay. By extension most people won't pay. So, most artists won't get paid, and so no art will be created. No music. No painting. No novels. No movies. No games.

I think not. People will continue to make music/painting/novels/movies/games. Maybe not as many---but maybe not. Look at Youtube. All of that amateur stuff. Most is the utter dreck of Sturgeon's Law, but some is actually Not Too Bad.

And why do the artists do it? Gasp! People do things Without Being Paid! Maybe they do it for the fame. Or sheer ego.

Or they find other ways of being paid. Patrons. Concerts. Merchandise. Advertising.

My point is that if you abolished copyright, you would certainly disrupt things, but you would NOT abolish art. You might not even disrupt things as much as you might think.

Music, great music, existed before the Statute of Anne (1710). Monteverdi, Corelli, Purcell, Couperin, Vivaldi, Telemann, Bach, Scarlatti, Handel---all born before 1710. There was a time before copyright.

Are you merely being sarcastic and arguing that piracy hurts artists? In that case, we should find a better way than the current copyright regime to reward artists, because the current copyright regime doesn't work very well.

Here is a data sheet for such a modem