The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Massive fail - the anti-social world of social media > Comments

Massive fail - the anti-social world of social media : Comments

By Adam Ferrier, published 3/11/2009

Social media may well be killing our entire society one anonymous comment at a time.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Well said. Those with dissenting views will be crucified, or sent to the gulag, along with fat people and smokers.
Posted by dorothy42, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 8:08:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
dorothy42: "Those with dissenting views will be crucified, or sent to the gulag, along with fat people and smokers."

and all the men...
Posted by Antiseptic, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 8:13:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
1. I don't think that Voltaire actually said that: it was in a later commentary. But let it pass.

2. The opinions held by people do not change, that is that whilst the distribution of a particular view is unaltered by the social media, this fact : e.g. say 80% REALLY believe that the world is flat, becomes changed to the perception that "everybody" believes something else and therefore you are a minority of one instead of belonging to a majority of 80%: because of the operation of social media. Government then believe what the polls etc tell them, but only hear what people think is a "proper" reply. They then act in the mistaken belief that to do otherwise is courting political disaster.

3. What is the cure? I don't know, but you will doubtless note that this reply is from anon!
Posted by Gorufus, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 8:39:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
True on this board as well. Many seem more interested in the poster rather than the article, in personal evaluation rather than careful consideration of content.

Political correctness has done the most damage of all. Alongside multiculturalism and the nanny state politics. Seems democracy allows for individual dictators to blossom. We are judged, moralised, ridiculed and treated as children everyday in so many ways.

Our speech has to appeal to the lowest common denominator, hence all we talk about at gatherings is sport and money.

So forums are a good outlet as being anonymous allows you to say what you really think as society restricts it. So yes a shame some ruin it.

The Printers Apology by Benjamin Franklin may need to be taught at school as we have actually found ourselves set back a few hundred years, despite never have so many means to communicate. Also that interrupting legal free speech is a denial of basic human rights.
Posted by TheMissus, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 8:49:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nice article Mr Ferrier. It would be smooth if the anonymous cowards who 'need to feel safe' were relegated to some kind of world-wide sandpit for children only, but that would be yet another sort Internet censorship which goes against the freedom of speech to waffle on like an adolescent. It's maybe better to help remind them that IP numbers identify everyone's mummy's and daddy's ISP just as well as the names on their passports.

There is a stage that we all seem to go through in our online understanding where we get so amused by thinking up fancy pseudonyms for our alter-egos, and that passes as we start to learn how juvenile those habits look to others, but some of those with axes to grind or questionable motives cling onto the illusion of anonymity, and I like to read some of their rantings because it helps me to know what thoughts might be behind the eyes and dirty looks when I have the misfortune to have to encounter them in real life.

Still, it's not what CERN invented the www for. I tend to just draw the line plain and simple. If a someone is too ashamed to put at least their first name to their own essay, then it's probably not worth reading. Conversely, your essay was worth reading so thank you.

Sean Moran.
Perth, WA.
Posted by Seano, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 9:08:49 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well said Adam Ferrier, and Seano.

I've noticed that those who regularly post the most hateful, inane and puerile comments invariably do so from behind the coward's cloak of anonymity.

I post under my own name because I believe strongly that we should own what we say, and be prepared to be held to account for comments that we make in public fora. Having said that, I accept that there may be good reasons for some people to post anonymously, but that should come with the caveat that anonymity should not be an excuse to make comments that one would not make to another in person.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 9:47:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The reason why many people spend time to attack the author on sites like this and many others has lots of roots.
I often find myself more interested in the Author motives, rather then what they are saying simply because that is the more interesting part of the process. This is especially true when you get the sense that the Author is projecting their failings on the rest of us, or when they a giving a sermon from on high.

This piece is an excellent example of the former, anonymous comments have been with us for a long time. Commenting without putting your name to it can often be a coward’s way it can also be the only when that people can feel free to speak their mind. Either way we shouldn’t be afraid of comment however it is given.

The other end I=of this is to review the Author themselves, Can we look at this is a different way, Why is the author afraid of anonymous comment, does the author seek to be able to attack the person rather then the feedback and can’t do this if the comment is give anonymously? Or is it from some deep-seated fears of not fitting in from school?
In the words of Chopper TTFU, you should never be silent through fear.
Posted by Kenny, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 9:59:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
quote C J Morgan
"I've noticed that those who regularly post the most hateful, inane and puerile comments invariably do so from behind the coward's cloak of anonymity".

CJ Morgan, Your name is anonymous though, common name and may not even be real, so do you suggest you do to use what maybe a real name then that gives you the right to be hateful, inane puerile because I would rate you as the worst offender.

You certainly are hateful toward those that do not share your viewpoint. You have suggested many have a mental illness, including myself. How does this contribute to debate? Is it not designed to disrupt it and judge some not worthy of an opinion unless it is yours? As Benjamin Franklin suggests in his apology :=

"That it is as unreasonable in any one Man or Set of Men to expect to be pleas'd with every thing that is printed, as to think that nobody ought to be pleas'd but themselves"

I am not bothered by it, but does tend to bore one into going away. Nearly all your posts are the same, no real contribution. You seem to hunt down anything that may offend you so you can do your extreme right wing religous style moralising against the writer. Like a stalker in fact.
Posted by TheMissus, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 10:42:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
C J Morgan,

I take great exception to your comment that 'I've noticed that those who regularly post the most hateful, inane and puerile comments invariably do so from behind the coward's cloak of anonymity.' I always try to remember to put my name on posts >:(

Joe Lane
Adelaide
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 12:25:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ah rubbish.

'Many people will be reluctant to express themselves for fear of ridicule, judgement, or derision.'

How on earth are people to be affected by the comments of people they don't know, and will never see? My god what a precious and timid society you paint. Most people don't give a stuff what a bunch of anonymous ranters say about their thoughts.

Anyway the protection of anonymity works both ways. People can now say stuff about things they previously might have been too scared to in normal society. It opens communication on many taboo topics.

What you lot really want is for everyone to bow down to your opinions. Go back to the days where publishers and editors could sensor all public debate and speakers corner was the only outlet.

What you really want is for a certain few to be able to write without being challenged. Write a book if that's the case and ignore the reviews.

'the loudest voices will belong to those with the thickest skin. The sensitive person won’t put their hand up under these conditions.'

Nothing has changed then by your own admission in the school classroom. Social media hasn't change anything.

Just a thought, did you ever think the problem may be you. Go find a course in assertiveness.

'So to the editors, and contributors of these platforms I implore you to out the anonymous and don’t accept their comments. '

Classic. So you argue freedom of speech through censorship. Good Idea!
Posted by Houellebecq, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 2:41:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Missus,

'CJ Morgan, Your name is anonymous though, common name and may not even be real, so do you suggest you do to use what maybe a real name then that gives you the right to be hateful, inane puerile because I would rate you as the worst offender.'

Toorite. Everyone on here is really anonymous to anyone but Graham.

'You certainly are hateful toward those that do not share your viewpoint. You have suggested many have a mental illness, including myself. How does this contribute to debate? Is it not designed to disrupt it and judge some not worthy of an opinion unless it is yours?'

Another great point! I vote CJ as being the No1 accuser on OLO of mental illness!
Though in your case I'd likely side with him. You are a bit of a nutter. But that doesn't take anything away from the great points you just made.

CJ,

My real name is Babarra Sexington. I'm a recovering drug addict and stripper. I look forward to your new found respect, and I anticipate you will not be so cowardly as to not meet me face to face now that we 'know' each other.
Posted by Houellebecq, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 2:56:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
LOL Babs and Joe Lane.

TheMissus - CJ Morgan is my real name. It's the name by which I'm well known in my community and under which I conduct business. Anybody with a little bit of nous can locate me if they want to. I don't post anything here that I wouldn't say to someone's face - including the frootloops. Also, I don't hate anybody, but I do deplore bastardry in all its forms.

Having said that, I don't take it too kindly if a frootloop who knows me decides to take it upon himself to intrude on my family holidays.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 3:20:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh. My. God.

This is by FAR the worst, saddest, most pathetic, emotionally-charged and whining article I have ever read. I'm starting to feel the need to go back and find everyone else who've written a lousy article and apologize to them for not being THAT bad.

Although Houellebecq has perfectly outlined what is wrong with it, I feel I owe it to the principle of FREE SPEECH to reinforce it.

Gone are the days where you had to keep your thoughts to yourself for fear of being attacked by some idiot or mob (possibly even physically) who can't handle what you say and is much too stupid to make a counter argument, and the only thoughts expressed were moderated through a handful of newspapers and a few TV execs.

If you ask me, the old-fashioned way was more like "keeping quiet or getting hit by a rubber"

The beautiful thing about today is that thanks to anonymous internet posting, ALL topics must now be open for discussion, regardless of how politically-incorrect they are, and everyone that doesn't like it can only either try to use counter-arguments, or if they're too stupid, whine.

Ignoring that anonymous posters who post MEAN comments are themselves just as susceptible to the NASTY words by others, so I don't see where the 'cowardice' is. But I think the real reason some people feel this way is because there are some things they can't handle and just want to suppress- just like the good 'ol days. After all, free criticism makes like hard for a LOT of people worthy of criticizing.

To these crybabies all I can say is go find a kleenex and cry into it.

Sticks and stones. Can't stand the heat etc...

I'd LIKE to believe this guy is just taking the pizz to get us debating, but I don't think that's what it is.
Posted by King Hazza, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 4:15:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr/s Morgan, I feel the need to apologise if I have played a part in getting you into that mess back on p2, but I thank you for your honesty, which is obviously a very rare quality in Australians these days.

I suppose that it's fair to conclude that Mr Ferrier has a point about the ruination of the World-Wide Web (et al.) by the uneducated and/or sneaky masses, under the misled banner of 'free speech', which was not meant to mean that anyone is free to troll around the web under supposed false identities, but that honest people can speak their opinions under their true name without needing to hide in fear.

Much of the reason is possibly due to greed, because they don't want their bosses to know that they're fooling around on web-forums when they're getting paid for their time at work, as well as those who I have met online who don't want their uni lecturers to find out what they really think of the studies that they are hoping to get graduated from (delayed greedification), but in any case, it's either one of those old traditional 8.3 notation 'helo_wld' geek notions that we can let go now that we have the technology, (and that's acceptible for newbies to this medium) or it's about innate dishonesty and fear of being caught in the act. I consider that web-abuse because after 11 years online, it's become pandemic now.

Until I found this forum, I thought it was more of a yankee disorder, but it's quite evidently infected Australia too now.

Like Don Henley once sang:

'Call some place paradise, and kiss it goodbye.'

RIP World-Wide Web.
Posted by Seano, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 4:43:16 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Some of the most telling critiques of injustice or misgovernment were distributed anonymously, and contributed to the development of our present system of democracy.

The nice thing about the online forum is that ideas can be approached from many angles and arguments weighed on their merits. Anyone is free to disdain anonymous detractors, but ignores well-made points at their peril. The truth stings big names and organisations even when not attributed.

Rusty Catheter.
Posted by Rusty Catheter, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 5:33:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Anyway the protection of anonymity works both ways. People can now say stuff about things they previously might have been too scared to in normal society. It opens communication on many taboo topics"

I hate it when he is right and that was absolutely spot on.

CJ I've seen plenty of nasty, hateful comments from people posting under what appear to be real names. Of the regular contributers over the time I've been on OLO I don't see a pattern one way or the other.

For many it's probably about their perception of risk from unwanted consequences to the expression of their views.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 5:47:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJMorgan, I used to contribute to another forum a few years ago using my real name. I guess I must have slipped up at one time and given out a clue to where I lived too, because I recieved a very nasty, threatening letter in the post one day.

You see, there was an awful topic we were discussing on pedophilia and the Catholic Priests. This letter described how this sicko felt about children, and said I just didn't understand how it was for 'them'.

I was absolutely terrified as I had a young daughter at the time.
It put me off writing anything anywhere for years!

I have only recently ventured back to these pages as a contributor, and am glad I have done so.
However, while using another name, I still write exactly the same way as when I used my real name. (whether that is good or bad-:)
Posted by suzeonline, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 6:10:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Adam and others

Interesting article. True, I only wish I lived in a world where it was possible to always sensible to put ones name.

That doesn't mean that when it really counts I haven't been prepared to put it on the line.

The problem is that I could and did put up with the rubber band behind the ear but it is often a LOT more.

As an adult retaliation has been everything from
being threatened with a gun, (once by a known hit man) (other x2)
drive by bullets through the windows,
threats of (numerous)
actual beatings, ( X4)
obscenities painted on the road in front of our house,
house being egged
even my dog being fed mince meat and razor blades,
run off the road, (x2)
threatened to be sued,
my family threatened by anonymous calls to females of my family late at night, (several)
and more.
Yep it pays to be known. And I'm not even well known by comparison.

Mind you that has been over 30 years. One might ask what did I do to deserve this?

I campaign for the rights of Aboriginals to vote.
Belonged to the original Australia party (ZPG being the actual cause)
Defended some 'boat people' being allowed to move into our area.
Defended a girl and mother from being punched and kicked as they entered a birth control clinic.
Defended a family victimised in the Painters and Docker royal commission
Blew the whistle on Council/Mayoral abuses denying democracy etc.
The list goes on.

Adam, I say this not for self glorification but to indicate that courage of convictions can have consequences. As a non entity I and my family are very vulnerable.

It is repeated here on OLO usually because I advocate for objectivity, civility and higher standards. And yes, sometimes I get it wrong and take my lumps.

Some people, like blowies, are happiest circling the cesspit and will fight vehemently to stay there. The sad thing is they fight just as vociferously to force others to do the same.
Posted by examinator, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 6:53:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hell Examinator, What a experience of brown shirt behaviour! More credit to you that you continue to put your opinions out there and haven't been turned off contributing your opinion altogether.

Turning the tables on them, using your own name and talking about your experiences might raise a bit of a sweat on them in future. I can imagine they wouldn't like the fact that they have left themselves exposed by harassing you and it could come out.

I don't use my married name when commenting here, which hopefully will throw off Susie's type of nutter if someone takes objection to me as I'd be harder to find.

I think if you closed off comments to anonymous posters because of a few nasties, you would lose a lot of the variety of comments and stifle the discussion. My geek offspring told me that anonymous is the default position of most sites that allow you to comment and looked a bit worried that could change.
Posted by JL Deland, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 8:02:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For the most part I think that the issue of anonymity is a furfey on a site such as this. The moderator has access to some real details and if those were faked then so to could be any real names posted on the site. This is not a school room where we can get hit from behind and the teacher is powerless to tell who did it.

If a posting rule is breached it's just as visible if the poster uses an alias as when they use a real name. If a serious legal matter is at stake an alias does not protect (any more than a faked real name would).

An alias does protect (to some extent) from those who like to use the threat of legal action to shut down opposing views. We have had that in the past on this site. It does protect (to some extent) from those who might otherwise take their objections off site and outside the law. It does protect third parties who might otherwise be identifiable if the poster was identified (not always appropriate when family law or child protection issues are discussed). It provides an avenue to put opinions which might otherwise cause real grief because of an individuals circumstances.

In summary
- if a real offence is committed using an alias does not protect the poster on this site from legitimate consequences.
- use of an alais can and does provide a degree of protection from illegitimate consequences.

I've not seen any serious and valid reason's to insist on real names being posted here.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 8:44:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
GY knows my name. I trust him to behave ethically in dealing with that information. I don't trust the would-be authoritarians like CJ Morgan to do so.
Posted by Antiseptic, Tuesday, 3 November 2009 9:07:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I had assumed this article to have been lodged under the category of 'humour and satire'.

A check of the OLO main page revealed, however, that it had been lodged under 'media', so by inference the article is intended to be taken seriously. We all know how seriously the (main stream) media takes itself, and it seems Adam Ferrier is fully identifying with it with the publication of this article. A check of the 'today's most popular' display on the same page, as at around 6:00 AM, showed this article as third most popular. Better give it its just desserts, then.

Adam Ferrier says:

".... under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights the right to freedom of speech is
in part “the right to hold opinions without interference”.
However, “the anonymous comment” is direct interference
and intimidation."



What drivel.



He also says:

"The irony is that social media was going to give everyone a voice."

Social media has done exactly that, given virtually everyone a voice. The power, or influentiality, of any individual voice is utterly dependent upon the discernible quality of expression in any given instance. It stands or falls according to its intrinsic merit. Its anonymity is irrelevant.



I think the giving of everyone a voice is the author's problem. It seems to me that, consciously or subconsiously, he wants to be (or perhaps remain) one of those privileged 'loudest voices' in an otherwise homogenised world in which those with views different to his will have no voice and not be tolerated if they display dissent in any other manner.



OLO is to be commended for having given page space to this view, which, was it to be imported into common practice, would be so destructive of its own Forum. As should be well understood by all who post on OLO, should there be any need for a poster to be required to answer at law for what they may have written, upon registration sufficient information is required to be contributed as would permit the tracking down of that person in real life.
Posted by Forrest Gumpp, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 7:36:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Forrest Gumpp: "What drivel."

Yup. Adam Ferrier obviously hasn't spent much contributing to social sites he writes about, otherwise he would know it's drivel.

He should ask our dear OLO contributor chainsmoker (who said he was a lecturer in the social sciences at some Uni, but who has sadly gone quiet of late). I guess he could just look at chainsmoker's past posts. As chainsmoker observed on numerous occasions OLO is a self regulating community. Even the anonymous posters observe the unspoken rules, and pull each other into line when they are broken.
Posted by rstuart, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 3:20:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Examinator, I must say that is absolutely disgusting behaviour done to you, and that your post should be read by everyone who still feels anonymity is 'dishonest'.

And Rusty- damn straight- everyone should re-read your post as well as you two have effectively summed it up.

I imagine such people will either read your posts and realize they were wrong, or pretend they didn't and make some ambiguous statement about something easier.
Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 3:23:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well I never gave my name, said or did anything and was sent hate mail threatening my children (did not have any?) from the middle eastern gangs. I still like muslims but understand the hatred when the Examinators of the world suppressed the right to vent by those that had their childen raped, their homes invaded and their neighbourhoods trashed. Even those of thier own community fled. Then the suppression led to Cronulla riots and still the Fluffyworld saw the gross violaters of human rights abusers as the victims. Same now happens with the tamils. It seems some are so racist only white can be racist becase all other races are animals so not capable of racism.

Examinator hero for putting up with far less. Oh big hero. Get out there in the real streets then report lol.

Examinator has had it easy, real easy. Plus a choice they made, unlike most.
Posted by TheMissus, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 3:34:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I remember living in Sydney for 8 years too many, I sat in a park in Kingsgrove and ethinc gangs slash each other with machete dressed in school uniforms. One child had his back slashed to pieces and the blood ran free. I went to to the main street and the whole street was littered with school children hacked to pieces. No real press interest. No Examinators in sight. Hush this one up, we may get accused of racism. Gag the police. Same with women and children abused in their community. Hushed up too long because it would offend the white man who does not want to be seen as racist even if it means women and children suffer abuse. Their feelings afterall are far more important.

White man gets a bad letter, white women get raped and hosed down in between seesions. Oh well as we keep white man happy and make him hero for suffering such a bad thing?

Then they say they care about Indigenous but why would allow boat people when simple illegal fisherman transfer TB to Islanders/ I am not sure you care, just for yourself and for your ego. Like Noel Pearson says a man in a Koala suit that goes home to a nice life really has no right to support the Indigenous. Afterall they have had that type of representation for decades and has not worked yet.

If you want to be an expert on humanatarian issues first you need to be a human, not a university spat out robot. Life is a whole lot different from the human side of the line.
Posted by TheMissus, Wednesday, 4 November 2009 3:51:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The article sort of brings it home. I too (like others in this thread) have suffered the wrath of the deranged, the delusional, or just plain angry individual. Threatened and attempted violence (to me, my family and our property) did and still does have a sobering effect on contributing to on-line opinion forums using real names. OLO does not know who I am. Given my profile, I registered using a concoction of family names and genders. The email address I used for registering/notifications is a ‘non-person’ at a ‘domain name’ without a website. OLO would know my ISP address but so what; I am not in breach of any of OLO’s rules:

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/display.asp?page=legal

Personally, I have experienced smear by insult, innuendo and fabrication just because I use a non-de-plume. From observation here, this would not change even if I did use my real name (so why ‘out’ myself). Sure, I do challenge peoples’ ‘comfort’ zones on things I know something about; for this the retorts tar me. I use a pseudonym because their stones and spears don’t penetrate. OLO is just an ‘opinion’ site - it is the ‘opinion’ being made that matters (or not) – not the person making it, whomever that person might be, imo.
Posted by Q&A, Thursday, 5 November 2009 1:53:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anonymity allows for some creative thought.

Some people pursue this revealing of everyone who posts as a way of stifling debate and shutting down dissent (or disagreement with say a consensus), as then they can focus their own and others scorn and hatred.

Playing the person so to speak.

Look at the spite dished up to any AGW skeptic.
Posted by odo, Friday, 6 November 2009 2:20:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
what King Hazza and Forest Gumpp said
Posted by barney25, Saturday, 7 November 2009 9:07:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy