Privacy Gone Amok, Or so some say Options

i.e. the true internet

You have!!

Congratulations, the second person on my block list. It took the other person about 1000 times more posts to achieve it.

Anonymity is the basis of society.

Any more like that?

I'm sorry, do you show your ID when you go to the store?
When walking down the street?
Tell everyone your name?

Do you carry your "papers" with you? This isn't 1930s Germany. This isn't Soviet Russia. We respect anonymity.

Sometimes it's hard to tell a troll from someone who has lived too long in his parent's basement.

What if the house is a bridge, Kelly?

Sometimes it's hard to tell a troll from someone who has lived too long in his parent's basement.

Aww, how adorable. Not only are you unable to put up a decent argument, you have to resort to pot shots.

Seriously, you have only proven yourself related to a fascist mindset. You can attack me all you want, but you will never dig yourself out of that wretched hole.

What if the house is a bridge, Kelly?

As long as it's not a Bridge to Total Freedom.

And if that doesn't completely derail this thread, I don't know what will.

Once you start revealing identities, there is no more protection. As I pointed out above, identities are used now to claim a CoI in order to ignore reliable sources and weight issues. It can only get worse from there.

Ottava,

You are addressing a huge philosophical issue here that you weren't aware of. Most people here think that using real names and not hiding your identity is going to solve a lot of problems. I disagree, heartily. I'm fine with the "other point of view" prevailing here. But I don't have a big "real name issue" at the moment. It seems that you do - and unfortunately, you picked the one place where you will find lots of sympathy for abuse on WP, but "the opposite of sympathy" for complaints about real names being released.

At times, I've found the strong "opposing views" about real identity/names found here to be kind of harsh. Which they sort of are. That's what you've come up against.

Why are people here so tough about that? Because many people here think that hiding behind an alias is cheating, or that it allows the other person to "get away with things" like writing about real people while hiding behind a mask.

There's a lot said on this site about how a perfect world would involve use of all real names. I couldn't disagree more. I respect their different opinion (from my own); but I point to that many of the most abusive people on (for example) Wikipedia use their real names. I think the abusiveness had different roots. I think the "way of solving it" is otherwise than revealing everyone's names.

Sorry you hit the wall here. But this is the culture.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Thu 14th August 2008, 5:33pm

Ottava,

You are addressing a huge philisophical issue here that you weren't aware of. Most people here think that using real names and not hiding your identity is going to solve a lot of problems. I disagree, heartily. I'm fine with the "other point of view" prevailing here. But I don't have a big "real name issue" at the moment. It seems that you do - and unfortunately, you picked the one place where you will find lots of sympathy for abuse on WP, but "the opposite of sympathy" for complaints about real names being released.

At times, I've found the strong "opposing views" about real identity/names found here to be kind of harsh. Which they sort of are. That's what you've come up against.

Why are people here so tough about that? Because many people here think that hiding behind an alias is cheating, or that it allows the other person to "get away with things" like writing about real people while hiding behind a mask.

There's a lot said on this site about how a perfect world would involve use of all real names. I couldn't disagree more. I accept their opinion; but I point to that many of the most abusive people on (for example) Wikipedia use their real names. I think the abusiveness had different roots. I think the "way of solving it" is otherwise than revealing everyone's names.

Sorry you hit the wall here. But this is the culture.

And the people that agree with them are exactly the ones they don't like.

The people that agree with them are the ones who use the identities to declare conflicts of interests and push them off the encyclopedia.

That only proves that the people who still hold those opinions here don't have a clue.

Why are people here so tough about that? Because many people here think that hiding behind an alias is cheating, or that it allows the other person to "get away with things" like writing about real people while hiding behind a mask.

I actually subscribe to this theory based off of personal experience.

Why are people here so tough about that? Because many people here think that hiding behind an alias is cheating, or that it allows the other person to "get away with things" like writing about real people while hiding behind a mask.

I actually subscribe to this theory based off of personal experience.

If you ever went to a pee wee football or baseball game, you will see that people will act far worse in front of people that probably know them.

Why are people here so tough about that? Because many people here think that hiding behind an alias is cheating, or that it allows the other person to "get away with things" like writing about real people while hiding behind a mask.

I actually subscribe to this theory based off of personal experience.

If you ever went to a pee wee football or baseball game, you will see that people will act far worse in front of people that probably know them.

So far I've yet to have anyone at a game (and they occur at a park within walking distance of my home), tell me that they're fucking my mother's dead corpse. (She's still quite alive, though)

Hell, the fourth amendment is all about it.

But heres the rub - I doubt you really care.

Not don't care, don't have a clue what you are on about.

Anonymity is the basis of society. I have the right to talk to my neighbors and the rest without people knowing about it. Its the basic right to privacy, and the government requires proof before they can violate that right.

I think donors to WMF ought not to be allowed to give their real names, address or credit card numbers. If they want to give to WMF they need to just put cash in the trash receptacle pictured outside the WMF mauve world headquarters in the suppressed photo.

Why are people here so tough about that? Because many people here think that hiding behind an alias is cheating, or that it allows the other person to "get away with things" like writing about real people while hiding behind a mask.

I actually subscribe to this theory based off of personal experience.

If you ever went to a pee wee football or baseball game, you will see that people will act far worse in front of people that probably know them.

That is probably pseudo-anonymity of crowds.

That said, I am not sure revealing ones much vaunted true name over the internet to people a thousand miles away will help at all. Even if you know I am John Smith, I am still effectively anonymous, and will probably make jokes to you that offend me.

That only proves that the people who still hold those opinions here don't have a clue.

Well, yes and no. If I were in this argument, and pissed off (as you are) I can see making this declaration. But the people who believe this have a different life experience, (and probably) job function (where the private and professional are sufficiently blended so as that they are fine with discussing private views in their real names, for one example), most of them are male (females tend to be more protective of their names, because there's the old online predator thing that appears to be more of an adverse thing for women than men ---- unless you are DS, ).

Calling people 'clueless' (paraphrased) doesn't do much in the way of persuading them that you are right. I'm sure you know that, but we all need to be reminded. Having said that, I've found that even logical arguments do nada, so I'd just let it go. WR is a tech-heavy culture, much like Wikipedia. And this POV is normal in tech-heavy cultures.

If I were you, I'd just take this "one particular topic" somewhere else. It's a topic here that most people here feel "that way" about, and there's no changing it. As I said, I disagree. But I also don't feel that emotional about it at the moment. If I did, this is the 100% worst place to rave about it. You might as well go to Wikipedia and argue for........ I don't know what. (Jimbo's repudiation? Slimvirgin excommunicated? --- some argument pretty much impossible to win)

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Thu 14th August 2008, 5:44pm

Please observe the heading at the top of the page.

This is NOT the Usenet Review.

This is NOT the Internet Review.

This is NOT the Twinkie Chat Room Review.

This is NOT the Pee Wee Football Game Review.

Please do not come back until you learn how to read.

Jon

THAT'S RIGHT!

Take your damned analogies and put them where the sun doesn't shine!

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Thu 14th August 2008, 5:46pm

We're the asshole review?



Wait, I guess so.

So far I've yet to have anyone at a game (and they occur at a park within walking distance of my home), tell me that they're fucking my mother's dead corpse. (She's still quite alive, though)

You can look it up on youtube if you don't believe me. There are fights and brawls at these games all the time.

You can hear people cussing and giving the finger while driving down the road and their license plates are quite visible.

How about protesters that throw rocks and riots?

You skew reality to emphasis your point.

I think donors to WMF ought not to be allowed to give their real names, address or credit card numbers. If they want to give to WMF they need to just put cash in the trash receptacle pictured outside the WMF mauve world headquarters in the suppressed photo.

They have donors?

Well, yes and no. If I were in this argument, and pissed off (as you are) I can see making this declaration. But the people who believe this have a different life experience, (and probably) job function (where the private and professional are sufficiently blended so as that they are fine with discussing private views in their real names, for one example), most of them are male (females tend to be more protective of their names, because there's the old online predator thing that appears to be more of an adverse thing for women than men ---- unless you are DS, ).

Calling people 'clueless' (paraphrased) doesn't do much in the way of persuading them that you are right. I'm sure you know that, but we all need to be reminded. Having said that, I've found that even logical arguments do nada, so I'd just let it go. WR is a tech-heavy culture, much like Wikipedia. And this POV is normal in tech-heavy cultures.

If I were you, I'd just take this "one particular topic" somewhere else. It's a topic here that most people here feel "that way" about, and there's no changing it. As I said, I disagree. But I also don't feel that emotional about it at the moment. If I did, this is the 100% worst place to rave about it. You might as well go to Wikipedia and argue for........ I don't know what. (Jimbo's repudiation? Slimvirgin excommunicated? --- some argument pretty much impossible to win)

Ah, but as you already said, they are set in their way so there is no reason to bother convincing them.

Now, Wikipedia is about reliable sources, "everyone can edit", and the such. It sure seems like having privacy would ensure that people focus on the reliable sources and allow people the right to start over. Being "outed" does not.

We're the asshole review?



Wait, I guess so.

As they say: "It take one to know one"



(waves at JzG)

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Thu 14th August 2008, 5:53pm

Not really. I understand that people do stupid things and get in fights at games (I do follow the news). They are in the minority though, exaggerated due to the sensationalistic media.

The same goes with protests. Some might be angry, but most protests don't go that way. Larger protests (and the more newsworthy ones) will have a greater chance for a flashpoint...but that's following the laws of probability. l I will say that I have in fact heard worse invective from some protests...but that's because I'm counting the Westboro Baptist Church.

However, from my experience, unless I get a game with users that I know, there is at least one fuckwit in a game.