Subject:
|
Re: Allocation of member #'s
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 3 Jul 1999 00:36:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
835 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Ed Jones writes:
> [interesting ideas snipped]
>
> [...] And if someone already had a number, consider letting them change
> their number to the CLSotW number.
Heh heh, whoops, I guess I didn't make the uniquess aspect clear. :-)
There aren't any circumstances[1] where someone would ever be able to
change their number, once they've chosen it. The whole point of making
unique #'s in the first place is that they're permanent, one per person.
Kind of like social security or driver's license numbers, only I think I
may have hear rumors at one time that because of some computer glitch,
SS#'s aren't unique in 100% of the cases (but it was always inteded that
they be unique).
--Todd
[1] Except maybe if someone is part of a witness protection program and is
assigned a new identity by the government. But then in that case, they could
never say, so the old "them" would actually be dead and the new "them" would
actually be a new person, philosophically speaking.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Allocation of member #'s
|
| (...) [snip - does any bother to do this anymore?] (...) Well from what I've read so far, people do care. So let me throw out another possibility - CLSotW numbers - it covers the majoirty of "oldtimers", they already exist in LUGNET and could be (...) (26 years ago, 2-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
112 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
