Re^2: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW by dsheroh (Monsignor) on May 14, 2017 at 08:30 UTC
Even if we blithely assume that this means there are more trolls today than a year ago, it seems unlikely that a rule restricting them to trolling only in SOPW would do anything to change that. I can see the OP's suggestion, if implemented, maybe doing a bit to cut down on posts to the wrong section (...which itself assumes that most AnonyMonk posts are the sort of thing that belongs in SOPW), but that's about it. The content of the posts would still be exactly the same.	[reply]
Re^3: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW by ww (Archbishop) on May 13, 2017 at 19:16 UTC
Sometimes I wonder if I'm merely an insensitive pig... ... or whether we gotten a lot more PC, and a lot more touchy. Frankly, had I been around and had more time to spend here, over the last several week, I most assuredly would have voted "Keep" on some of the nodes which have recently been considered and reaped. Princess and the Pea, anyone? Spelling correction: thanks chacham Come, let us reason together: Spirit of the Monastery Quis custodiet ipsos custodes. Juvenal, Satires	[reply]
Re^4: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW (board policy) by LanX (Saint) on May 13, 2017 at 23:02 UTC
I think we are living in a time where political correctness gets "redefined", especially in the English speaking world. But while the maximo leader from Mar-a-Lago is using at least his own twitter account to spread his "charming" insights, we are confronted here with regulars (with IMHO pretty obvious mental problems) who ride rude attacks, while cowardly hiding in the dark as AnoMonk. Not opposing this - especially when they single out one "target" after the other - will consequently lead to a loss of good contributers and hence to a decline of the monastery. I hope my POV is clearer now, of course YMMV.° Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :) Je suis Charlie!} update °) I'll use an anonymous account to insult you later. ;)	[reply]
Re^5: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW (board policy) by ww (Archbishop) on May 14, 2017 at 13:24 UTC
But why worry about rude attacks from AM? Do they harm you; your kids; your relationships; or your future? And did you drop a word of phrase in the para beginning "(n)ot opposing ...?" Perhaps a pronoun referring to the OP's proposal? Pls clarify: what are you "(n)ot opposing?". You can even do so in the anonymous insult, if you wish.^1. Spirit of the Monastery Quis custodiet ipsos custodes. Juvenal, Satires ¹ It hadn't occured to me that one might place a footnote below the sig.	[reply]
Re^6: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW (board policy) by LanX (Saint) on May 14, 2017 at 21:36 UTC
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re^3: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW by Anonymous Monk on May 13, 2017 at 17:08 UTC
And what is that supposed to prove? More trolls? Nope, just more of them were reaped. And the question of wether anons should be blocked has been asked and answered often enough, sundialsvc4.	[reply]
Re^4: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW by LanX (Saint) on May 13, 2017 at 17:28 UTC
Not more trolls, always the same. Jeff. :) Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :) Je suis Charlie!}	[reply]


Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
	PerlMonks

Re^2: Restricting Anonymous Monk to SOPW

update