Anonymity

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by Guest on Fri Oct 31, 2008 12:56 pm

I am Jason Thompson and I not scared to tell ya all, Chat with ya all soon

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by T on Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:02 pm

Timeout wrote:One of the funny things I've discovered is that when you change your identity on the SJ posts now, it changes your name throughout the archives.
To my knowledge, it's always been that way. It can be very amusing.

T

Number of posts : 2740
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by KevinNSaisi on Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:54 pm

bug wrote:Phil and Kevin, I respect your thoughts on anonymous postings, I just don't agree with you.

I think there are times when someone needs to be anonymous for any number of reasons. I think making up a fictitious name to present a point is dishonest.

Why do you feel a fake name is dishonest?
avatar
KevinNSaisi

Number of posts : 723
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by Timeout on Sat Nov 01, 2008 5:22 am

I think what's dishonest isn't using a fictitious name but rather using multiple names to create a false impression. Here are a few examples:

First, I saw it on the Open Doar a lot where someone would post with their own name and then underneath it post again as if they supported the first post and they were someone else... this creates the illusion that multiple people support their point of view.

Then one of the selectmen wrote a letter supporting his own actions in a controversial situation, telling himself how great he was...that was pretty strange.

Finally we've all seen postings using multiple identities on TRR which creates a false impression of just how many voices they represent.

Quite often, whether it's the Sun Journal, Rumford Free Press or TRR, it boils down to just a few regular posters. The nature of TRR's postings has had a negative impact on it's base of contributors, while RFP's base is growing. When you're drawing from a smaller pool of opinion, the diversity of that opinion is limited and cannot truly reflect the community. RFP doesn't claim to completely represent the community either but we do welcome differing opinions. Admin and C have truly set the tone for that welcome. I'm proud to post here.

Yes, the Open Doar had it's flaws while everyone was trying to "grow up" in the blogging department and yet it served as a vehicle to open up community discussion. We can go in any direction we want - my hope is that we continue to mature as a blogging community and that we continue to welcome diversity of opinion as a key element to growth in understanding our own part in town government.
avatar
Timeout

Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2008-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by Guest on Sat Nov 01, 2008 6:32 am

KevinNSaisi wrote:
bug wrote:Phil and Kevin, I respect your thoughts on anonymous postings, I just don't agree with you.

I think there are times when someone needs to be anonymous for any number of reasons. I think making up a fictitious name to present a point is dishonest.

Why do you feel a fake name is dishonest?

A fake name, by itself, doesn't make for dishonesty. My guess is that you, being a relatively intelligent person, know just what I meant, but I'll humour you and explain:
JSN wrote a scathing letter addressed to Chief Carter, published it on her web site, signed it with fictitious/fake name (R Ortez), and on the same web site brazenly derides THIS web site for allowing ("cowardly") anonymous posters.

I am bug. bug is a made up name, but I am a real person and some people on this site know who I am. As "bug", and as myself, I own every word I write here.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by KevinNSaisi on Sat Nov 01, 2008 8:02 am

How do we know that JSN authored that letter? Couldn't RT have authored it? Perhaps someone else? We have no knowledge of who the actual author is, so it is unfair for us to judge.

What possible justifyable reason would justify using a fake name to attack someone?
avatar
KevinNSaisi

Number of posts : 723
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by Guest on Sat Nov 01, 2008 5:15 pm

KevinNSaisi wrote:How do we know that JSN authored that letter? Couldn't RT have authored it? Perhaps someone else? We have no knowledge of who the actual author is, so it is unfair for us to judge.

What possible justifyable reason would justify using a fake name to attack someone?

Surely your questions are rhetorical?

Is it "unfair" for you to judge who put up political signs before you know the facts?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by KevinNSaisi on Sun Nov 02, 2008 11:44 am

No, my questions are not retorical. If I ask a question, I expect an answer unless stated otherwise.


What possible justifyable reason would justify using a fake name to attack someone?


As for my comments on political signs, I don't see it unfair. I have spoken with Dave, who has assured me that his signs were there first. The signs were put up either by, or on behalf of John Patrick. He, as a candidate, is responsible for following the rules. It is illegal to place a sign without permission, and I am questioning that John has the permission of over 90% of those who gave permission to Dave. I think it is very fair to raise the question. Political parties cry :unfair" anytime they are caught doing something wrong, just look at the national campaigns.
avatar
KevinNSaisi

Number of posts : 723
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by Guest on Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:35 pm

KevinNSaisi wrote:How do we know that JSN authored that letter? Couldn't RT have authored it? Perhaps someone else? We have no knowledge of who the actual author is, so it is unfair for us to judge.

What possible justifyable reason would justify using a fake name to attack someone?

Kevin, Maybe YOU have no knowledge of who wrote the letter. Thus you'd be right: It WOULD be unfair for YOU to judge. But just because YOU don't know who wrote the letter, I think it's unfair of you to think and assume that no one else knows. Smile

I can imagine several scenarios where someone might resort to using a fake name, though the reason may not be "justifiable" by your standards. Protecting the true identity of the author is one reason; making up a fictitious name would make it seem that there are more than the actual number of people who express a particular view is another.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by KevinNSaisi on Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:40 pm

If a person is not fabricating allegations, and only using facts, why would they need to be protected? I have survived attacks from both sides. Smile
avatar
KevinNSaisi

Number of posts : 723
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by Guest on Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:44 pm

Kevin,
I don't think we're on the same page...........................

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by KevinNSaisi on Sun Nov 02, 2008 1:39 pm

Well, since you are responding to my comments, I don't see where I lead the conversation astray. The topic is a letter on TRR. I made a comment that we (non TRR affiliated) don't definately know who the true author is. You the countered with comments about reasons a person would post anonymously, without consideration for such reasons being ethical (justifyable). You have already misinterpreted my questions as rhetorical. Where am I going wrong here?
avatar
KevinNSaisi

Number of posts : 723
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Anonymity

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum