Author: KarinsDad
Date: 06:57:31 01/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 1999 at 03:33:05, Peter Herttrich wrote: >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 >> > >at minimum the danger exists. > Danger of poor posts? We don't have that now in some cases with real names? > >>Are you claiming my posts are poor? Or KK's posts? What is the real reason that >>anonymity bothers you? > >KK? I think everyone here knows, that KK is Alan in Canada (forgot his >pastname, sri). He is not anonym. Yes. Alan's name has been posted today and Emailed to me today. I apologize to Alan for bringing his name into this as I respect his privacy evidently more than other people respect my privacy. > > >> >>>, 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? > > >If in my club a member is running around with a camouflage, I have to >ask myself and also him/she, what has to be hidden? Does it matter? You act as if your suspicious nature is more important than my right to privacy. > > >> >>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? > >May be, but did you not want to know, who is your opposite? >I can accept much more the oppinion of a known person then from >an anonymous. > > > >> >>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). > >How can you know, how Bruce thinks or feels? I do not. However, indicating that I did has gotten Bruce to respond with a lengthy and more reasonable post on the topic, hence, like you said below, I pushed his buttons for a more explanative dialog. > >> >>Are you afraid that I am secretly Sean? Heaven forbid! > >No one has said this! No, but it had the desired effect of illiciting a response. > >I only asked you for your real name. And that your account darmanus >sounds crazy for me .... and German. > >But I got the expected answer. I'm glad I didn't disappoint. >And it seems that i have pushed the right button at your keyboard ;-| Yup. No argument there. :) > > > > >Here an idea for the charta of this club: Every member should work >with it's real name. This idea is intrusive to my privacy. It cannot easily be enforced, and I doubt Steve wants to go to that level for a mostly reasonable group of people on a free message board. Keep thinking :) KarinsDad > > >Peter
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.