Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

Get rid of Anonymous Monks?

by neshura (Chaplain)
on May 08, 2000 at 03:48 UTC ( #10553=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Anonymous Monk's Logging

How does an IP address deter flaming? I don't know if it would really, considering how many people are still tied to dialup and dynamic IPs....
To be honest, I don't see any need for Anonymous Monks at all. A registered login can be just as anonymous -- you could probably track me down using my login, but you'd have to have a serious problem with one (or many) of my posts to go to all that trouble. (And if I'm that offensive, maybe someone SHOULD be able to track me down to tell me so in person)
On /., it's one thing to have ACs, who are protected because they might be DOJ employees or Microserfs. But who needs to hide behind a veil of anonymity here at Perl Monks? Only flamers and cowards, and the people who keep losing their passwords. I fully expect you privacy advocates to jump all over this. While I support anonymity in general on the Internet, I see no compelling reason to offer monks a disguise so they can flame at will.
I read the AC's response to reptile's first attempt at obfuscation, and found it completely unwarranted and quite mean-spirited. But of course, I had no way to vote it down.

It seems unbalanced, that people can log in and get XP for their knowledge, and then log out to be rude -- and not take the hit to their reputation. I greatly look forward to logging in tomorrow and seeing my XP take a dive. That's the way it works. The only way a community with a common interest in sharing and accumulating knowledge can work is when people stand behind their opinions (whether moderate or extreme).

Oh yes, I can think of many excellent reasons to disagree with me, but I'm not going to give anyone free ammunition :-)

e-mail neshura


Comment on Get rid of Anonymous Monks?
RE: Get rid of Anonymous Monks?
by BBQ (Deacon) on May 08, 2000 at 04:04 UTC
    I can see this turning into a very long node if we get into the netiquette, the AC, flammers, et al discussion, but I don't want to let this one go just yet...

    You said:
    While I support anonymity in general on the Internet, I see no compelling reason to offer monks a disguise so they can flame at will.
    and I totally agree with that! As a matter of fact, just to set the record straight, my name is John Burbridge and I can be reached at (+55-11) 3744-1760 or "talk johnny@chthon.warp.psi.br". :o)

    But I beleive strongly in anonimity and I think it is a matter which each individual user should have the right to opt for. Being known as BBQ or John makes absolutely no difference to me, but I know I does to a bunch of people. I think the idea of cutting off the Anonymous Monks sounds a bit ... err.. radical(?), and the only other imminent solution that I can think of is the IP posting. I agree that it doesn't solve the issue, but I think it helps.(This could be a pretty good poll question, btw)
      Indeed it does sound radical. That was my point. I posted something not just radical but inimical to a great many people (including myself, sometimes), under my only login. (Which I use everywhere, it's as much me as my real name is)

      Yes, this could be a long thread if we were to really take up the question of anonymity on the Internet, but I just wanted to throw an idea out there. I don't mind long threads -- no discussion should be unwelcome.

      Though anonymity is, of course, a sacred cow to every proper freedom-loving technoanarchist.

      (and I do so love hamburgers)

      Maybe I'm a troublemaker, suggesting something like getting rid of AMs. But let's go back to the original question. We know that there will be a real problem that will most probably occur -- the signal to noise ratio plummeting. So, what will keep the site usable if this happens? We don't have a lot of case studies to go on...e2 and /. are about all that there is. And e2 is ALL noise. That's okay, that's what it's there for -- it self-selects for the gibbering sort of person. /. is a study in riot control, and it lives on the edge of chaos -- an interesting place to be, unless you are frustrated with the GD module and you need a quick answer because your boss expects something ready to go in less than 14 hours. Perl Monks is painted as a monastery -- probably a more apropos metaphor than the founders even intended. Knowledge is sacred and noise is banned in quite a few real monasteries, even today.

      Okay, so noise bothers me, personally. But this is a democracy. Just because I get upset when some tentative newbie is crudely flamed does not mean that I am right. I actually think the IP suggestion could work. But it seems hypocritical when compared with my idea -- "Yeah, we're definitely pro-anonymity, but we're gonna log your IP address just in case". In case what? Someone uses the shield of anonymity to say something rude or unpopular, possibly over and over again? If the majority is pro-anonymity, then the majority should be willing to let AMs roam unencumbered. To do otherwise would be a farce.

      So, nice to meet you John (really!). My name's Amanda. If you or anyone else would like to talk/argue/bitch me out, my home # is (408) 530-9348. I welcome your opinions.

      email neshura ::I'm not anti-noise, I'm pro-signal::

        You wrote: "Yeah, we're definitely pro-anonymity, but we're gonna log your IP address just in case".

        Well, you see, by giving out the IP address of the poster I wasn't exactly hoping to expose the real person behind the IP. It was more in the lines of guessing what the posters UID was! The more I think about this, the less it makes any sense, but I'll go ahead and explain anyway, just for food for thought.

        If every post I make comes from 200.212.47.* (at home) or from shambler.warp.psi.br (at work), it would be pretty obvious who I was in the event that I logged off and posted as AM. Knowbody would actually know that I'm John (unless I freely gave out that information) but there would be a pretty close possibility that the AM could be associated to my UID (BBQ).

        I guess the, "I'm not so sure" factor also comes in handy here. The truth is people tend to be more careful if they see that their IP address gets posted. I used to run a Quake forum here in Brazil, and one of the ways that I reduced the number of trollers was by posting the IPs. I have no idea why this works, but it does! I'm sure we won't get rid of all of the rude posters, trollers, and AMs, but I beleive it might help. And on the other hand, why not?

        BTW: Loved the title. :o)
        BTW2: I can't spell.
        BTW3: Well met, Amanda!

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://10553]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others examining the Monastery: (8)
As of 2014-11-29 04:07 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My preferred Perl binaries come from:














    Results (203 votes), past polls