A Couple Of Questions

This has been a continuing question on many webistes I participate in, and I too am interested in our readerships views.<p> <i>I must say, though, I wish it were mandated that people identify who they are. Why hide behind anonymous? </i><p> Some websites do require people register, and then allow registered users to post Anon. Some, like Vive, believe it is important to allow unregistered users to post their thoughts. The problem being, the internet is more or less permanent. If you read some of my earlier postings here, you'll see my views on some matters have changed because I have learned and grown during my stay here. Should that be held against me in the future?<p> <i>I welcome opposite viewpoints, but I think it cowardly to hide one's identity. The anonymous phone call. How much credibility can we put behind it?</i><p> My identity is hidden. My home address, phone number, name, everything is on this website, but only in a place where certain people can see it. It was placed there when I was asked to moderate, and join the Vive board of Directors. I asked that they respect my choice that my online persona and my meatspace persona remain related individuals, because of an incident I had where because of a percieved error by my online persona, someone wished me harm IRL. And everyone has respected my request.<p> Some people are incabable of that kind of trust. It is sad, but we must respect the choice of some people to anonyminity. Of course, we cannot build up the persona of an Anon in our mind past the single post we read. I think the credibility of an anon post should be encapsulated in that post only. The reader should not draw any more conclusions than what is in that post.<p> Facts, opinions, links should be taken for what they are. Remember, not all anon posters are trolls, not all trolls are wrong. Sometimes a good troll can bring up some good points while they are trying to get under your skin. The best trolls always do. The also provide good mental exercise for the participant in a conversation with an accomplished troll. I've seen Anon's reply to themselves in order to try to start a conversation going.<p> Report the rude, racist, hate filled ones to me, sthompson or jvanherk (at) vivelecanada.ca<p><p>---<br>"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill<br />

I would prefer signed postings but I too have not logged in and posted anon. Some of my anon postings are not nearly as well reasoned as my signed. Doc- we won't hold any of your aforementioned postings against you as long as you continue to learn and grow.
That can't be said for many of the diatribes of some anon posters. Is there freedom to speak your mind in anonymity or mindlessly speak?

The answer to your question is best answered by thinking about Google power. Think about what happens if an employer sees that you can actually think and speak on your own feet on all these nasty issues on which many special interests groups profit; belive me they do and are actually paid for doing that (among other checks). Employers nowadays want their staff extremely focused. Worrying about saving the world is something that is not commonly welcome most unfortunately. I do not think there is much difference in between speaking out under an alias or under anonymous other than your alias is likely something that will have a whole lot more credibility than an "anonymous". An alias can be checked against the stances that have been taken on issues, something that you cannot do on an anonymous; I tend myself to simply discard them. Correctness is a huge issue and is getting worse IMHO. Aliases provide some help but the scheme is far from being bulletproof in this brave new world. I would agree that tolerance levels on anonymous trolls could be lowered as they can be most disruptive: I do like the Vive new approach on logging what they are moderating out. I think we have sufficient check&control points on the correctness on Vive.

---
"We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"

I often forget to log in because I am a moron (just like right now ... hey, wait a minute! My 'harrisp' username is showing up but I swear I did not log in. But I digress ...), but I always sign my name to my comments. And I would be a lot more comfortable if everyone did.

When some Anon is shredding an article I have written, I would like to know if it is only one Anon who doesn't like what I've said, or if there are multiple dissenting Anons.

Paul Harris

I too would prefer the alias, instead of anon. It just helps to keep the arguments straight in my head. I tend to imagine a person and if everyone is anon, there is no grounding. Even if it was anon 1 and anon 2, it would be helpful.

---
rhondda

By the very nature of anonymity, we can't possibly distinguish between anons. Anonymous means anonymous, not just mostly anonymous. (however, the admins do have *some* recourse to deal with abuse).

Basically, we believe that anonymity is a requirement to have free speech. The anonymous posts here tend to represent commonly held beliefs, and usually contribute to the conversation. Forcing people to log in would remove that and lead to a false consensus.

---
Canadians are asking, why do americans hate us? They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to disagree with each other.