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. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All
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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All

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