But here's the thing: what does allowing people to post RL information that they don't want posted buy us as a discussion board? I can't think of a single thing, other than some loose ideal about "free speech or die!!" Is it worth it? I don't think so. I'm all about prevention being better than cure, so why not just take the option off the table? I, like many people, like a minimum of rules, but that in no way makes me an anarchist. Some things are better off regulated (assuming they're regulated effectively). And this isn't some ambiguous, difficult to interpret rule here. It's pretty straightforward, from what I can see.
I'm not advocating the posting of RL information on the board. I think more than enough has been done for Trevor in this situation. The information is gone. The new rules are useless against any real threat to people's careers, families, etc., especially when the information is posted publicly elsewhere. Honestly what's the point? I don't agree at all with things posted at MAD being off limits here. If you're going to post a picture of yourself wearing a Mickey Mouse hat on the Internet, expect someone to see it and repost it in an Internet debate. I don't see that as the great privacy trespass others seem to.
harmony wrote: Produce your PhD in psychology, [Doctor] Cam.
Madame,
Are you requesting I post "in-real-life" information? Oh my. Would I be foolish enough to do that and risk the admonitions of our residents? Certainly not!
Very Respectfully,
Doctor CamNC4Me
Post Script- Mr. Ttribe. I appreciate your wit. I often think of Mr. Elmer Fudd whenever you post. I thought I was the only one that voice-overed posters!
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Post Script- Mr. Ttribe. I appreciate your wit. I often think of Mr. Elmer Fudd whenever you post. I thought I was the only one that voice-overed posters!
Maybe go with Charlie Brown instead of Elmer Fudd. Just a friendly suggestion.
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Post Script- Mr. Ttribe. I appreciate your wit. I often think of Mr. Elmer Fudd whenever you post. I thought I was the only one that voice-overed posters!
Maybe go with Charlie Brown instead of Elmer Fudd. Just a friendly suggestion.
As an example of what the OP is about, ttribe, I have seen people use your real first name on this board, but I would not use it because as far as I am aware you want to be known by your screenname here.
As an example of what the OP is about, ttribe, I have seen people use your real first name on this board, but I would not use it because as far as I am aware you want to be known by your screenname here.
I'm not particularly concerned when either my first or my last name are used separately. I NEVER use my first and last names together in a post on these boards though. The Google/Yahoo/Bing bots are quite good at their jobs.
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Are you requesting I post "in-real-life" information? Oh my. Would I be foolish enough to do that and risk the admonitions of our residents? Certainly not!
You are always free to post your own information, Cam, real or otherwise. Of course, since your real life PhD in psychology is nonexistent, I'm sure your scholar-level knowledge of neurosis and neurotics is as nonexistent.
A poser.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
ttribe wrote:The Google/Yahoo/Bing bots are quite good at their jobs.
That's ultimately the issue, isn't it?
I see this issue as etiquette. The decision to "out" one's self or not shouldn't be made by someone else, and we all know the many personal and business reasons why members would want to remain confidential on the fora---even if we all know who that person really is.
I get what Scratch is saying about unintended consequences, but if the "because we all want the truth" idea of this board is going to work (which it has for a long time), nobody should feel like cyber blackmail is something they really need to worry about.
Darth J wrote:That's ultimately the issue, isn't it?
I see this issue as etiquette. The decision to "out" one's self or not shouldn't be made by someone else, and we all know the many personal and business reasons why members would want to remain confidential on the fora---even if we all know who that person really is.
I get what Scratch is saying about unintended consequences, but if the "because we all want the truth" idea of this board is going to work (which it has for a long time), nobody should feel like cyber blackmail is something they really need to worry about.
I agree.
by the way, I added this comment after you replied:
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: Mr. Ttribe. I appreciate your wit. I often think of Mr. Elmer Fudd whenever you post.
That's interesting. I never imagined what ttribe sounds like, though I do think that he looks like he smells like pee.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14