Comments on: All the blog’s a stage

By: chutney

chutney — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 13:33:36 +0000

Wouldn’t want you to point fingers here. Seems like the best method for dealing with anonymity abuse is to confront it head on, when it happens. At least for UU blogs, we have a responsibility to give and receive needed correction inside our religous community.

By: Jess

Jess — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 00:48:49 +0000

While stemming from a conversation with UU bloggers, these issues are blogosphere-wide. I have seen some of what I call questionable behavior from UU bloggers and/or commentors in the past, which is why I think the conversation is worth having on a larger level. And no, I’m not going to point fingers at specific people, ’cause that’s a waste of time.

By: fausto

fausto — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 00:39:44 +0000

In my case, I blog under a pseudonym not because I’m trying to avoid accountability for my words, but because I’m trying to avoid indiscriminately spreading my real identity all over the Internet, where it is accessible to all kinds of strangers, some of whom make their living by misusing private information. I’ve already had to abandon one internet service provider account name due to the deluge of spam and solicitations it attracted, before I realized that it was my participation in online discussions that was revealing my identity to data miners.

There are a lot of bloggers and other Web enthusiasts who do not share my concern for personal privacy, or perhaps my alarm over the prospective risks to privacy and consequences of losing it, in cyberspace. The online UU community is small enough that readers who take my comments seriously can find out my real identity easily enough, and I don’t mind at all if they are interested enough in what I say to want to know who said it. Most of them have already met me in person anyway, or else already know someone who knows who I am. As far as I’m concerned, though, people who don’t really care about what I’m saying don’t deserve to have my identity handed to them on a platter through this medium to use for their own unrelated purposes.

By: chutney

chutney — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 00:01:20 +0000

First, I assume that youâ€re referring to the first sentence of the passage youâ€ve quoted - and it says exactly what I meant it to say. Some people donâ€t want to own up to the things they say anonymously, which is why they post anonymously.

Fair enough. Point taken. And I'll agree with you that absolute anonymity is impossible. Still, I'm uncomfortable with the "some people." Since this started as a UU/GA discussion, do you know of any UU bloggers who abuse anonymity? (I had assumed the UU blogosphere was the context for your post, but your update make me think I was wrong. Am I?)

By: Jess

Jess — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 22:48:55 +0000

Iâ€m going to leave aside for now Jessâ€ implicit allegation of irresponsibility and denial and assume that sentence was just poorly written. Instead I want to deal with Jessâ€ underlying assumption: public authenticity is not only possible but also good.

First, I assume that you're referring to the first sentence of the passage you've quoted - and it says exactly what I meant it to say. Some people don't want to own up to the things they say anonymously, which is why they post anonymously. Second, my underlying assumption is not so much one of public authenticity as a removal of the assumption that anonymity is absolute. Many people use an anonymous persona in order to hide something from their physical world life, or to simply say nasty things about other people. I don't believe that all anonymous bloggers do this, obviously, but there are enough that make it a problem. See the update over at my site for an example.