More than one person has questioned our current policy of allowing users to post anonymously, ie a username that does not reveal the author's identity. My personal views on this are as follows:
a) This is common practice in internet discussion forums.
b) Newspapers also often print letters by 'name and address supplied'.
c) People may have various reasons for not wishing to disclose their identity. Fear of reprisal, for example.
d) An insistence on posting under real names would discourage many from posting.
e) In any case, as administrator I have access to the email and IP addresses of every registered user. We respect your right to anonymity, but only as far as the law permits.
What do you think? Is it fair, for example, that Lawrence Marshall can be criticised by anonymous users of this forum? Or should we be prepared to put our names to our opinions?
anonymity
-
Guest
Anonymous postings.
Hi,
I didn't try very hard to give myself a nom de plume!
There are some wonderful names on the memberlist, the humour is great!
Those posting on topical subjects aren't anonymous - they are making these same statements elsewhere. If you are involved in the community you know or can guess who each person is!
I would credit the local councillors with that capacity too!
There is also Bob's ability to erase any posting that would be offensive to others.
I think it should be left to run as it is. It is more interesting when people feel free to put their point of view.
Susan
I didn't try very hard to give myself a nom de plume!
There are some wonderful names on the memberlist, the humour is great!
Those posting on topical subjects aren't anonymous - they are making these same statements elsewhere. If you are involved in the community you know or can guess who each person is!
I would credit the local councillors with that capacity too!
There is also Bob's ability to erase any posting that would be offensive to others.
I think it should be left to run as it is. It is more interesting when people feel free to put their point of view.
Susan
-
Burt Toast
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 10:07
It's common practice for users of online forum to use usernames which are not their real name, not to to remain anonymous but to have a unique easily recognisable name. If we all used our first names or even second names on anything but the smallest forums you quickly get duplication and confusion. Usually there is a link between the username and the person and as said before its content that counts.
So Jacktar it is!
So Jacktar it is!
-
Surrealist
Heheheh
How exactly would you enforce the identity check if that became the policy?
How could you trust that people were who they said they were?
Surely it would be difficult to regulate without a credit card, which is patently ridiculous on a web forum, and would put off potential users of the site.
If the system were any less than strictly regulated (you couldn't just use an email address as that doesn't always have a correct name in it) then it would make it easier for someone to impersonate someone else.
Also, don't we all have the right to privacy, and hence anonymity, on the internet? Everything seems, to me at least, to point towards us all having anonymous usernames - and it makes it all the more fun when you do get friendly with somebody "online" and end up meeting them for real.
How exactly would you enforce the identity check if that became the policy?
How could you trust that people were who they said they were?
Surely it would be difficult to regulate without a credit card, which is patently ridiculous on a web forum, and would put off potential users of the site.
If the system were any less than strictly regulated (you couldn't just use an email address as that doesn't always have a correct name in it) then it would make it easier for someone to impersonate someone else.
Also, don't we all have the right to privacy, and hence anonymity, on the internet? Everything seems, to me at least, to point towards us all having anonymous usernames - and it makes it all the more fun when you do get friendly with somebody "online" and end up meeting them for real.
-
Guest
This quote is from an email I received recently:
Fair comment? DiscussI think these discussions generate a great deal of heat, but they don't get a real purchase on the topics in a way that would help us move matters forward constructively.
I think the main reason for this is people's anonymity and the social group dynamics that flow from that. When we do not know one another's identity, we feel more free to gossip. We also feel unconstrained making unsubstantiated and unkind remarks which we would not dream of making if we allowed ourselves to be identifiable and therefore accountable.
If my opinon counts for anything, I would say the website itself is immensly vauable, but the online discussion Forum - in its current form - is not. I would go so far as so say it undermines rather than supports community spirit.
-
Surrealist
It's a fair comment inasmuch as the person who sent the email is as entitled to his/her opinion as anyone else.
It's a very 2-dimensional view of web forums - what I mean by that is that forums are organic and whilst you may get away with the odd bit of gossip and slander, in general people stay loyal to, and hence respectful of, a particular forum and the "community spirit" grows.
The explosion of web forums worldwide and their massive popularity is a much better example than one persons opinion that they "undermine community spirit" - where are the facts behind that argument?
It's true that we feel unconstrained on forums like this if we are anonymous - but that is a good thing as it means that you are more likely to speak from the heart, and shyness is no longer a factor. Those reasons alone justify forum use for me.
Forums are a fantastic social leveller - whatever the circumstances of the individual which may mark him/her out of a particular social discussion setting are immediately discounted - as long as you have access to the net and can type, you have equal say. And no longer can people hog conversations or deny having said this or that - it's all there in black & white.
The worst quote from your email is that the "social group dynamics" don't "move matters forward constructively".
Obviously this person's only experience of decision making is committees, chairpeople, invited speakers, quorums, caucuses, card votes, etc etc
How very 20th century.
It's a very 2-dimensional view of web forums - what I mean by that is that forums are organic and whilst you may get away with the odd bit of gossip and slander, in general people stay loyal to, and hence respectful of, a particular forum and the "community spirit" grows.
The explosion of web forums worldwide and their massive popularity is a much better example than one persons opinion that they "undermine community spirit" - where are the facts behind that argument?
It's true that we feel unconstrained on forums like this if we are anonymous - but that is a good thing as it means that you are more likely to speak from the heart, and shyness is no longer a factor. Those reasons alone justify forum use for me.
Forums are a fantastic social leveller - whatever the circumstances of the individual which may mark him/her out of a particular social discussion setting are immediately discounted - as long as you have access to the net and can type, you have equal say. And no longer can people hog conversations or deny having said this or that - it's all there in black & white.
The worst quote from your email is that the "social group dynamics" don't "move matters forward constructively".
Obviously this person's only experience of decision making is committees, chairpeople, invited speakers, quorums, caucuses, card votes, etc etc
How very 20th century.
-
Bob Jefferson
- Posts: 6212
- Joined: 11 Dec 2004, 21:16
- Location: Planet Porty
- Contact:
-
Bob Jefferson
- Posts: 6212
- Joined: 11 Dec 2004, 21:16
- Location: Planet Porty
- Contact: