RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Morality & Ethics



Message

car2ner -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (4/30/2008 6:31:37 AM)

I use the same handle/screen name just about anywhere. I google my name (real and screen name) now and then. I remember not to post anything that I would be ashamed of later because a good detective could figure out who I really am without too much trouble. I have changed my mind about issues on occcassion so what I felt was true at one time may not ring true anymore. That is one thing to consider, since so much of this hangs around for who-knows-how-long.

I have acted and let that character do things that I wouldn't do as myself (nothing to be ashamed of again, just more outrageous). To think that you can hide behind a screen name and never be found out is not a good idea.



HighPlainsDrifter -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (4/30/2008 10:09:27 AM)

I like Prager's work. He makes a very good point, one I've pondered for a long time that anonymity, more often than not, brings out the worst in people. I genuinely agree that if people had to sign their names to what they write, they'd choose their words much more wisely.



Jhud -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (4/30/2008 10:37:53 AM)

quote:

But again, that doesn't mean much in the end, as it's nothing effective moderation can't take care of. If you have a problem with someone there's nothing preventing you from reporting them or merely choosing not to talk to them (there's no rule that states we have to respond to everyone that disagrees with us).


Well, while I agree good moderation is helpful, and while I think CW has wonderful policies that prevent much of the excesses seen elsewhere (part of which is the fact that posters aren’t wholly anonymous to moderators, and moderators are even less anonymous to each other) I think that just goes to further establish the point; we rarely need ‘moderators’ in ordinary communications when one’s identity is known, and good moderation in part entails knowing something about the posters, that is they are less anonymous.

quote:

Which is precisely my point I made above about it turning everyone into "mini-politicians." I really don't think the level of discourse would increase much at all, while the "freedom" of discourse would decrease dramatically (which would be a bad thing). We'd just become an internet version of Congress. I agree that it might decrease the surface level of absolute flaming and stuff like that (although there's really not a lot of that on this forum anyway), but I think the negatives would out weigh the positives.


See, I simply don’t find that to be the case in my experience. My identity here is fairly evident. I am open about my age, my point of view, my status in life, generally where I live, my life history, and other than the fact that I should update my picture some day, people know what I look like. To the degree I am anonymous, it has more to do with protecting those around me than protecting myself (which incidentally sort of takes care of itself when one is a strong conservative, since it is readily apparent I am a devout believer in the 2nd Amendment [;)] )

None of this has prevented me from stating opinions on issues exactly as I would in real life, though I think it has often prevented me from stating them in ways I never would in a face to face discussion; and that is a good thing. Indeed, I think that to whatever degree people find my posts worthwhile, it derives in part because I am willing to risk being known to others. And I know for myself I will weigh an opinion in part on how well I know a poster, because I know they too have taken a risk in that regard.

This isn’t to say there aren’t good reasons to be anonymous (believe me, I have gotten my share of hate mail) but I don’t think it can be denied that there is a direct relationship between anonymity and the occurrence of unseemly behavior.



lpt -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (4/30/2008 11:26:39 PM)

Jhud -- great topic to bring up. I ended up blogging about it over on The Boundless Line.



henny -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (5/1/2008 2:50:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
This isn’t to say there aren’t good reasons to be anonymous (believe me, I have gotten my share of hate mail) but I don’t think it can be denied that there is a direct relationship between anonymity and the occurrence of unseemly behavior.


I'm not denying that anonymity will attract bad behavior. I've acknowledged that several times now. I'm just suggesting that there are benefits to anonymity and that bad behavior can be controlled without having to remove anonymity. I think the many anonymous posters on this very site who are both intelligent and respectful in their posts are a testament to the fact that it's possible to behave in a civil manner while anonymous (just as politics in this this country is a testament to the fact that lack of anonymity does not always mean intelligent engagement and civility).

quote:


Indeed, I think that to whatever degree people find my posts worthwhile, it derives in part because I am willing to risk being known to others. And I know for myself I will weigh an opinion in part on how well I know a poster, because I know they too have taken a risk in that regard.


Speaking for myself, whether I know someones' name or personal information really doesn't factor much into how I evaluate what they say. I think their words speak for themselves, and whether or not someone has the ability to construct an argument really won't change at all if they are anonymous or not. I do respect you a great deal, Jhud, but this has always had more to do with your posts than your picture and name, and there are many anonymous posters on here who I respect as much as you.

I think you can usually tell instantly if someone is not being respectful or not taking any discussion seriously merely by reading their posts. So again, if you don't think someone is taking you seriously, then don't reply to them. Although, if you want to only reply to people who aren't anonymous, then that's your right as well.



OLEEguacamole -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (5/1/2008 3:51:23 AM)

reason number one that anonymity in forums is not as destructive as porn: it's not sin.

i have a known-as-myself internet life, (blogs, facebook etc) but here i have done my best of late to be anonymous. this for me is a discussion arena. i enjoy discussing ideas in ways i would not do very often in normal life. relationships can be strained even in good conversation that include differences. fellow church members and even blog readers would be distracted by our differences in theology, or politics etc and these are places that i usually focus on the agreed-upons, and don't care to bring in differences on a regular basis.

i think the sharing of ideas over the internet is a good thing. people are talking and debating. hopefully, thinking. people come and wrestle out ideas. sometimes working out their own, learning or being influenced, influencing others...when the time and place are right, in their real lives too.

when these forums started, we had real names not handles. i like handles better. real names are optional.



Bettawrekonize -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (6/27/2008 8:46:52 PM)

Jhud, interesting OP. I'm a big fan of of understanding computer security (and security in general). For example, I used to often listen to GRC podcasts (and they discuss anonymity a lot). I also used to hang around IRC a lot. I do think that channels where people are allowed to be anonymous are constructive. For example, if someone in some country where freedom of speech was prohibited wanted to discuss the benefits of democracy to others, chances are that he should be anonymous (or else he could face consequences). If someone could face consequences for, say, questioning the government (ie: for questioning communism or if they're questioning the decisions of leaders in an oppressive government), but they have something important to say, then anonymity could be useful.

Allow me to give you another example. You would probably agree with me on the fact that scientists who questions naturalism tend to be (dishonestly) discriminated against by the secular community. Well (as you probably know), there seems to be this one scientist that may question naturalism and he wrote a book called the Design Matrix. From my understanding, he is known as Mike Gene over the internet (and he posts at Telic thoughts) but (at least last I knew) he hides his true identity because he is (rightly) afraid that the secular community would dishonestly discriminate against him. To that extent, I don't blame him. When you have a system that unfairly discriminates against someone and that someone has something important to say, then anonymity could serve a good purpose.

If someone doesn't appreciate a channel where anonymity is allowed, they aren't forced to participate within that channel. If the moderators of a forum decide that they want to allow their users anonymity then they should be free to do so. They are also free to police their forums to suppress inappropriate posts. Those posters are free to move to other forums where such posts maybe more appropriate. Another example is IRC channels. Some IRC networks allow for different degrees of anonymity but moderators police the channels for anything they deem inappropriate. The system works pretty well. Moderators of other forums are also free to require members to disclose their information. For those who want to discuss information with others in-anonymously, they are free to enter those forums (or perhaps start their own). No one is forcing anyone to come to these forums (where anonymity is permitted) and no one is forcing anyone to come to forums where anonymity is permitted. If someone wants to enter those forums, they are free to. If they don't like those forums, they are free to move to some other forums. That's what an open market is about. I certainly don't think that disclosure should be mandatory.

Here is a podcast that discusses the pros and cons of anonymity. I think you'll find it insightful.

The Social Implications of Internet Anonymity (Security now episode 69)
http://media.grc.com/sn/SN-069.mp3 (64 bit version, 18 MB)
http://media.grc.com/sn/SN-069-lq.mp3 (16 bit version for the bandwidth impaired, 4.6 MB)
http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-069.txt (txt transcripts).
http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-069.pdf (pdf transcripts)

More podcasts from GRC can be found here
http://www.grc.com/securitynow.htm
SN-069.mp3



Cloak -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (6/27/2008 9:08:56 PM)

I think there is always an element of Risk in almost everything we do in life. The bottom line is not to let the past dictate the present, to maintain some kind of anonymity without becoming paranoid and then we can always Choose with whom we want to associate and with whom we want to keep our distance.

I have met some nasty even dangerous people almost every where I went, even in churches, and learned to maintain my distance from them.



Bettawrekonize -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (6/27/2008 10:00:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
But as we both agree those who desire to do what is wrong are more likely to desire anonymity, it would follow that they would be more attracted to those places (like much of the internet) that allows for such anonymity, would it not?


and a person can use a gun to defend himself or he can use it to attack someone else. A person can use a gun to hunt for ducks and he can use it to rob banks. A person can use a knife for its intended use (ie: to cut food) or he can use it illegally. A car can be misused as a weapon as well. So then, should we outlaw guns, knives, and cars?



solarflare -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (6/28/2008 3:44:28 PM)

quote:

Anonymity only enables people to more freely express their feelings. Anonymity values feelings over thought, and immediate expression over thoughtful reflection.


Keeping in mind ONLY the above quote from the original article - which I think represents the actual thought behind the arcticle in the first place, I would have to say that I am somewhat in agreement.

I doubt that some people would be so quick to say what they write as appears from time to time on these threads.

This, having nothing at all to do with those who have rec'vd actual real-time adverse effects resulting from information they may have volunteered at other times in other places.

I would not post under my real name or with my photo only because I prefer to protect myself and my family - so, I guess I must state I agree with the spirit of the article, but not the praticality.



upNORTder -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (6/28/2008 11:19:11 PM)

quote:

But as we both agree those who desire to do what is wrong are more likely to desire anonymity, it would follow that they would be more attracted to those places (like much of the internet) that allows for such anonymity, would it not




Even if people identified themselves, how would you know that they are who they say they are?Someone who desired to do wrong would probably have many identities.
If you argue a point anonimously you do not have any prejudices of the other poster to sway your opinions. You then have to analyze what is said without a filter.



Bettawrekonize -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (9/19/2008 1:30:45 AM)

I should have probably posted this in current events, but I figure it had to do with Internet anonymity.

quote:


A United Nations agency is quietly drafting technical standards, proposed by the Chinese government, to define methods of tracing the original source of Internet communications and potentially curbing the ability of users to remain anonymous.

The U.S. National Security Agency is also participating in the "IP Traceback" drafting group, named Q6/17, which is meeting next week in Geneva to work on the traceback proposal. Members of Q6/17 have declined to release key documents, and meetings are closed to the public.

A second, apparently leaked ITU document offers surveillance and monitoring justifications that seem well-suited to repressive regimes:

A political opponent to a government publishes articles putting the government in an unfavorable light. The government, having a law against any opposition, tries to identify the source of the negative articles but the articles having been published via a proxy server, is unable to do so protecting the anonymity of the author.


http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/09/the_nsa_teams_u.html

It's strange how the government(s) wants to track our behavior on the Internet but, at the same time, they want to hide their behavior/plans from the public (meetings are closed to the public).



ekserekseez -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (9/19/2008 3:56:38 PM)

Anonymity on the Internet is one of its great STRENGTHS, and is certainly not something to view as destructive. Wait until the US is as repressive as China or Cuba. You'll be pining for the days of anonymity!

And remember, all people have a perfect right to be anonymous. Unless I am in a contractual relationship with someone (married to them, owe them money, have harmed them in some way and must make reparations, etc.), my identity is not any of their business.



Oldwing -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (9/19/2008 4:00:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

There was an interesting column by Dennis Prager called Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn awhile back (didn't hear about it until recently).

In it he makes this point among others:

Some might argue that anonymity enables people to more freely express their thoughts. But this is not true. Anonymity only enables people to more freely express their feelings. Anonymity values feelings over thought, and immediate expression over thoughtful reflection.

There is not one good reason for any website, left or right, or non-political, to allow people to avoid identifying themselves. Anyone interested in serious political discourse, or in merely lowering the hate levels in our country, should welcome the banning of anonymous postings.

It would be interesting to find out how many websites continue to encourage anonymous postings. Presumably, they would pay some financial price by insisting on posters identifying themselves. I don't know why, and I don't know how big a price that would be, but it is hard to imagine that it is higher than the price society pays when hate, anger and irrationality become the normal way of citizens expressing themselves. And even from the websites' own perspectives this policy is probably self-defeating. I doubt I am alone in reading fewer and fewer comments sections because of the low level of so many of the postings. Just as bad money chases away good money, moronic postings chase away intelligent ones. I have come to the point where I even read fewer comments posted about my own columns.

With some security issues in mind, I personally try to be as open as I can about who I am and where I am coming from, but I find that many on discussion forums (particularly in the threads where I usually post) do not.

I am wondering, do others agree that anonymity tends to lead to anger and irrationality in discussions, and would identifying oneself lead to less of the same?

I believe that avoiding anonymity leads to walking and talking with authority. Doing less lessens the speaker and the message he/she is posting. Does it lead to a more angry/irrational discussion? It can if the poster lets him/herself get carried away. They call them 'Keyboard commandos'.



deliveredarling -> RE: Internet Anonymity Is as Destructive as Internet Porn (9/19/2008 5:03:00 PM)

I don't see the connection between posting anonymously and internet porn. They both seem like opposite ends of the spectrum.

It's not that I care if people know who I am, because if they know me, then they also know that I am the same on the internet as I am in real life.

I don't hide behind a name just to say inflammatory things. If I'm gonna say it, then I'm gonna say it no matter the anonymity or not.

Internet porn? Is there some relation to addiction here that I missed? I think hobby is a better word.

I do think people can post anonymously and get things off their chest that, in rl they may not have a safe avenue to vent with.

The people here are really great about feedback, sometimes even with the harsh painful truth.

I know I have posted somethings just to see what a real life perspective is or to see if my perspective needs adjusting.

I don't worry so much about the dangers because I just don't put too much info out there. It is a real concern and a real danger to put personal info for all to see.

To miss that point is very short sighted. To be cautious of that doesn't make another less credible though, IMO.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI