Feb 11, 2005 at 6:48 pm #1215889
Ethics behind Anonymous?
Why is this option even available?
If you are going to flame some one or something, atleast be man/woman enough to post a users name…
By doing so you gain more respect…
right or wrong, we all have strong opinions and those opinions become devalued as soon as they are made Anonymously:(
Anyway, Chime in… Anonymously, if you choose:)
KenFeb 12, 2005 at 12:10 am #1335668
Nice little site here, but I would appreciate moderators on the boards. Flaming especially anonymously only angers and does nothing to further what we are about. This is in reference to the stove roundtable discussion that seems to have gone awry.
Thank you. Robert Paul aka dellrazor.Feb 12, 2005 at 6:58 am #1335669
Sorry, horrible pun. But I’m not certain that one dubious post warrants a drastic change in the way we do things… yet. There’s still a vast majority of level headed folks around here to keep one or two goofy moments in perspective, and keep the thread on topic. Anonymous posts definitely deserve skepticism at best, esp. when they’re of the all-heat and no-light variety, but the anonymous option also encourages conversations like the one on retailer complacency and spending habits. I’m not saying a scorecard of these incidents shouldn’t be kept, but for now I call this one the first.Feb 12, 2005 at 7:00 am #1335670
@richard-sLocale: Supernatural BC
I agree. Please disable the Anonymous option. I really don’t see a use/need for it.Feb 12, 2005 at 2:09 pm #1335684
My job! Anonymous posting gives knowledgeable persons the option of posting their personal opinions, or unofficial info, without concern for towing a corporate line–whether the corporation is a manufacturer, publisher, or trade organization. That could be valuable to all of us. The limitation could be overcome by creating a bogus account, but that would be doubly duplicitous; and we are all aware that there is no veracity checking on the Net. If a post is mostly obnoxious spewing and won’t help a discussion, the moderator can simply move it to this forum whether its anonymous or not.
BTW, can the moderator or webmaster see the real name behind anonymous posts?Feb 13, 2005 at 10:01 am #1335694
Sort of like Insider Trading LOL:) That is a good point and I understand the reasoning behind the rest of the post.
Then and for your reasoning only, Turn off the Anonymous posting on all, but “Chaff”… This will allow people to Vent, Flame, Tattle or Leak without fear of retrobution(SP)…
Oh, Pilgrim… I agree, I realize you all have been doing this for along time. My one post may not change the world, but the intent was to simply bring the topic up for dicussion.
KenFeb 13, 2005 at 1:50 pm #1335696
Yes I am angry.
I will say it again…FLAMING IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE BOARD! Will I continue to PAY to be a party to or possible target for invective? NO!
With respect to the issue of anonymous postings: contributions made anonymously (not to say that there isn’t truth in the post) are considered largely uncredible. A title is a polite gesture and functional tool amongst the civilized. Flaming as an anonymous poster is simply craven. However this isn’t my beef just an irritation.
Can we have peaceable discourse, debate, polarized views without the denigration? I like a good argument but please leave the harsh language out of it. It is our different points of view that forward our cause….
Peace. dellrazor.Feb 13, 2005 at 2:49 pm #1335697
@kdesignLocale: Mythical State of Jefferson
Let’s not all go overboard as the result of a single
negative and misinformed (but to me amusing) post. Its very easy to resort to censorious action, harder to repair the unintended consequences of doing so.
The flamer even performed the signal service of spurring debate on the merits/demerits of canister stoves.
Anonymous postings work both ways– good in that it facilitates whistleblowers,etc. Face it, some folks will abuse anything.
I like the option of anonymity because I respect and trust most of the reasons people will and do use it for. Let’s not treat the forum users like children from which we try to remove any and all temptations. We’re all big enough to live through the occasional lapse of someone’s judgement.
Besides, it may provide future entertainment value.Feb 13, 2005 at 10:11 pm #1335700
Sorry if I came across as dismissive to your post. Regardless of my two cents, any questions that help us all define ethical use of the forums are questions worth raising.
-JasonFeb 14, 2005 at 8:40 am #1335706
@ryanLocale: Northern Rockies
Thanks everyone for bringing light to some of the issues to help this board grow and be a valuable resource.
The boards, for the most part, are moderated by the staff, and we have been deleting posts that have been inappropriate to the section, or moving those posts to a different thread, and in some cases, emailing the poster to let them know that their posts are inappropriate.
We don’t however, catch every one of them, and rely on forum participants to moderate for us as well by letting us know when you think a post is inappropriate, disrespectful, or a blatant FLAME. If you do find one, please email email@example.com. The staff monitors this email address and will address inappropriate posts accordingly. It would be most helpful if you identify the specific post (by clicking on the “Print” link, and copying the URL of the resulting page, and pasting that URL into your email to the forums address.
As for anonymous posts, good comments both ways on this as well. I’m going to let it ride for now, but in the future, if the privelege is abused, we’ll either pull it, or start storing usernames in the forum message databases so we can trace the anonymous posts, and contact the poster. Right now, anonymous posts are truly anonymous, although we do store IP’s so we can manually block IP’s from abusive posters.
Another option would be to allow anonymous postings only as a privelege by BPL Subscribers.
The main reason we have anonymous postings as an option is to give industry professionals a chance to participate in rational discussions without creating a conflict of interest from their company. It’s valuable to have their input, but at the same time, we recognize that their input as a public spokesperson for the company may result in views that are filtered through the company lenses.
At any rate, great discussions, I am monitoring this one, please provide more input. I want to ensure that our forums remain a valuable resource.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.