Author: Peter Kasinski
Date: 06:45:12 01/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 1999 at 17:16:05, KarinsDad wrote: >On January 20, 1999 at 16:28:14, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >[snip] > >> >>I think that a real name should be required, even though enforcement would be >>difficult to the point where it may not be worth even trying to enforce it. >> >>I think that anonymity leads to poor posts > >Are you claiming my posts are poor? Or KK's posts? What is the real reason that >anonymity bothers you? > Anonymity eliminates the notion of reputation. The image lacks civility. PK. >>, since accountability is nil, could >>cause extremely serious problems, since we occasionally have real votes, and >>leads to other distractions as well. >> >>I brought this issue up once before and it seemed likely that I was in the >>minority, but I predict that we will have to deal with these issues for real >>eventually. > >Why? If someone is not being abusive, who cares? > >Your entire reasoning appears flawed. Even with real sounding names, you cannot >have accountability, you cannot enforce it, you cannot even guarantee that all >of the names you currently have in the group are real, so what is the point? > >I have received an Email as well from a person who did not like anonymity, >however, this is not a requirement for this group. My belief is that anonymity >bothers some people cause "they don't know". That is the real crux of your >message Bruce. It has nothing to do with accountability or voting or anything >else except that it bothers you (and possibly a few select others). > >Are you afraid that I am secretly Sean? Heaven forbid! > >Have a nice day :) > >KarinsDad > > >> >>bruce
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.