Jump to content

Anonymity

Ted O'Reilly

By Ted O'Reilly
in Forums Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

  • 3 months later...
Christiern Newbie

Christiern

Posted
Posted

As for the Lil Armstrong story, yes, I have have an aversion to the use of the n-word.  Sue me.  As Michael Rappaprt, the white actor, said in a documentary about the origin and history of the n-word:  Anyone white who is using the word "n---er" and not getting his ass kicked, well something is wrong with that.

You seem to forget that I was quoting a black person who was quoting another black person.

Anyway, a friend told me top check out JC this morning--seems they are finally discovering what I pointed out a couple of years back. Ironic that you now have joined DEEP in exile, don't you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
patricia Newbie

patricia

Posted
Posted (edited)

It was a perfectly innocent poem--a bit too patriotic for my taste, but certainly not in any way offensive or to be taken personally. It apparently induced hysteria and an over-reaction (to say the least), but only in that one poster. Regardless of what you think of DEEP--and he has gone way over the line, at times--this was simply a perfectly understandable expression of his feelings in the wake of the attack. Reporting this to the FBI and ISP was uncalled for. Sorry Moose, but that DEEP was the victim does not alter the fact that what she did was senseless and vicious. There is no "feud" here, but when the subject is cyber civility, the rainy handle inevitably pops up.

How well I remember that mini-furor. If you remember, Chris, I actually posted the 9/11 poem for the amateur poet in question, who, contrary to RD, was still banned from JC. I posted it because while the rest of us were saying, in various ways, "Ain't it awful?", he actually wrote a poem, expressing his outrage very well.

So, it went on the board, under my name.

I received kudos initially, although I had said at the outset that it was not my work, but an honest expression of outrage that I felt deserved to be seen.

RD took offence when the poet was revealed. But RD takes offence at the drop of the proverbial hat. Outrage seems to be her permanent state of mind. Pity.

In another of a few unpleasant encouters with RD I made an innocuous comment about being raised to only hate people who had personally done me ill, regardless of their colour. She as much as told me I was a naive fool for not understanding racism. Since then I have avoided her and her thin skin and am much better for it.

As for posting under a handle, I use my real first name, mostly because I can remember it. I posted with a handle for awhile, [still life] but reverted to my real name.

I think that the difference between unsigned letters and internet discussions has been very well described by those who use them. What you post is important. Who you are isn't. It's easy enough for the webmaster to know who you are, if it becomes necessary. We register with our name and our chosen handle if we're going to use one. PMs are usually signed with the person's real name.

Edited by patricia
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Christiern Newbie

Christiern

Posted
Posted

I don't see anything wrong with using handles, per se. However, when people make personal attacks on fellow posters from behind a handle, as Rainy Day does, I think cowardice comes into play. If you notice, "Rainy Day" can't post for long without resorting to foul language and paranoid insults. I once posted her real name and had her foaming at her mouth--"outing" (if that is the right term) cowardly posters is not, IMO, wrong, but I would not do that to anyone who is not using as a shield behind which to hide while hurling insults. You may recall that I always used "hardbop"'s real name, because I felt his offensive, mean-spirited trolling required our knowledge of his true identity. In his case, it was a reminder, for I don't think he hid his identity in the early days of Jazz Central.

I know "Groper"'s real name but I never use it, because I see nothing wrong with his using a handle. Sure, I strongly disagree with his political views and find many of his opinions ludicrous, but his posts are never mean-spirited or venomous.

I think chronically venomous people tend to realize that their behavior is socially unacceptable, so they never sign their real name. As a radio station manager and broadcaster, I have seen my share of such hate mail--we called them crank letters--and they were never signed nor did they come with a return address.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jazzmoose Newbie

Jazzmoose

Posted
Posted (edited)

I dunno. In my case, hiding behind a handle isn't very effective, since my handle is also my website ("unbuilt" as it were) and anyone could easily find not only my name, but also my address. Hmmm....come to think of it, maybe this website idea wasn't very good. Guess I'd better refrain from abusing Chris... :g

edited to add...

By the way, Chris; while I have disagreed with you in the past on this issue, I do see your point. Even if there is no intention of doing so, one can get carried away, and I know that's easier to do under "jazzmoose" than "Mark Combs". Er...I mean "Mark Smith". Yeah; that's it...

Edited by Jazzmoose
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dan Gould Mentor

Dan Gould

Posted
Posted

By the way, Chris; while I have disagreed with you in the past on this issue, I do see your point.  Even if there is no intention of doing so, one can get carried away, and I know that's easier to do under "jazzmoose" than "Mark Combs"

Damn ... imagine how I might be if I was still the GHF.

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Rat Newbie

Dr. Rat

Posted
Posted (edited)

On Rainy Day: Perhaps we can put this one behind us?

On anonymity: I think having a fig leaf is important. After all what you do here is public in a way that most things aren't. As bizarre as it might seem, people could be reading this stuff years from now at the archive.

I like a level of accountability-- which I think we have here--Jim can track our IPs easily enough and effectively ban us if we abuse his hospitality. That's good. And anyone who is truly intersted can find out who I am, and that's cool too. But I don't think we need to have our true life names attached to everything we write here for all eternity. That'd be cruel indeed for some of us!

--eric

Edited by Dr. Rat
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Michael Fitzgerald Newbie

Michael Fitzgerald

Posted
Posted (edited)

After all what you do here is public in a way that most things aren't. As bizarre as it might seem, people could be reading this stuff years from now at the archive.

I don't think we need to have our true life names attached to everything we write here for all eternity. That'd be cruel indeed for some of us!

And why shouldn't one address this potential cruelty by being more responsible in what one posts? When you know that your name is behind what you're saying, might that make you think twice? And isn't that thinking twice a good thing?

It's not bizarre at all. Absolutely, people read what I have written via dejanews (oops - sorry, it's Google groups now) - going back well over a decade. And it's always been my name behind it. Have I changed/grown? Sure - what you read then is how I felt then, but it still had the full backing of my name then.

Mike

Edited by Michael Fitzgerald
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Rat Newbie

Dr. Rat

Posted
Posted

After all what you do here is public in a way that most things aren't. As bizarre as it might seem, people could be reading this stuff years from now at the archive.

I don't think we need to have our true life names attached to everything we write here for all eternity. That'd be cruel indeed for some of us!

And why shouldn't one address this potential cruelty by being more responsible in what one posts? When you know that your name is behind what you're saying, might that make you think twice? And isn't that thinking twice a good thing?

It's not bizarre at all. Absolutely, people read what I have written via dejanews (oops - sorry, it's Google groups now) - going back well over a decade. And it's always been my name behind it. Have I changed/grown? Sure - what you read then is how I felt then, but it still had the full backing of my name then.

Mike

So what do you think of Swift or George Elliott or George Orwell or "boz" or Mark Twain or . . . . . .

--eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quincy Newbie

Quincy

Posted
Posted

And why shouldn't one address this potential cruelty by being more responsible in what one posts? When you know that your name is behind what you're saying, might that make you think twice? And isn't that thinking twice a good thing?

Mike

It goes back to reasons mentioned earlier.

Some people have been stalked by loonies. That put an end to me using my name out in the open..

Jazz and music is not a profession for many of us. Hence spending time here is seen as goofing off.

Some clients might think Organissimo is a sex site. Though such idiots may not be worth having as clients, the money spends the same.

And so on.

I do agree that thinking twice is a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...