"If our system respect and protect our right to express our opinion, our thoughts, our dreams why do we use fake name? "

If I wish to be identified by my views I can. If I wish not to be identified by my views, I am free to do so.

The point, the views I hold are views which others can either agree or disagree with, regardless of the personality.

In this forum I choose to remain anonymous because

not all readers can be assumed to be ‘benign’
the views I express here are personal and not a view necessarily endorsed by any association I may have.

I agree with Robert

“If my views are worth less because there is not a real name attached then so be it.”

However, I do not need to know the details of Roberts identity to find comfort and concurrence in the words of someone who I consider to be a reasonable man.

KGB I did appreciate the quotes you brought to our attention.

I particularly liked the Lenin one

"He who now talks about the ''freedom of the press'' goes backward, and halts our headlong course towards Socialism."

It is out of kilter with the rest. It confirms the twisted nature of Lenin and all he represented

It falls in line with his other quotes, which display the malevolent mind of a communist

“While the State exists there can be no freedom; when there is freedom there will be no State.”

And of course as far as his reference to socialism, it can considered along with another of his quotes

“The goal of socialism is communism”

But most telling

“A lie told often enough becomes the truth”

The only defense we have to a lie told often enough is the freedom to counter it, especially when, Lenin’s political state was never inclined to truthfulness.

I would hate to see Lenin's freedom of speech curtailed

Freedom speech is the first check against abusers of power

Free speech allows us to discern between the sage and the fool,
Censorship makes them sound the same.

“A lie told often enough becomes the truth”

I agree too. It's both beautiful, and beautifully expressed.

I'm beginning to suspect that one of those lies is the pervasive nature of political correctness. We've all found some examples - David Irving's incarceration, the dastardly "niggardly". But can any of you who so enthusiastically congratulate yourselves for your truthtelling find any more relevant, immediate example of where you've been silenced. I keep asking. I can't find one.

If you can find one, I will fight alongside you. But given we're all on the same side, it's beginning to sound like a bit of a beat up.

As for anonymity, I'm with R0bert. I like playing around under a pseudonym and don't want to come out. I do other things under my own name.

Truly fascinating that all the quotations from KGB and Col Rouge are from people who are identified with their utterances (unlike "KGB" and "Col Rouge" of course).

I understand the various reasons why some people choose to express their ideas anonymously. However, not all such reasons are as legitimate as others. What I'm saying is that communicating anonymously in itself contravenes, if not 'freedom of speech', then quality of conversation. Engaging in conversation, or expressing an opinion, anonymously intrinsically changes the nature of the intercourse.

In my opinion, anonymity raises the bar for what is acceptable discourse - as opposed to, for example, face to face debates where the identity of participants is known to each other. However, what I see time and again in forums such as this is that people are willing to spout the most vile, idiotic and hateful ideas and insults at others - principally because they know (or think) they won't be held to account for their utterances personally.

This is of course why we have to have rules, moderators and such.

I'm pretty confident that the most vitriolic of those who plague this forum with hateful and bigoted ideas are actually pretty insignificant people in real life, which is why they need to be so nasty and brave as avatars and sock puppets.

I post here under my real name, and I'm happy to be held to account for anything I say. To me, that's real freedom of speech.

So, what if we set-up a forum where you had to use your own name, and where you had to have a photo on it, and where you had to have an identifiable address (perhaps suburb rather than number, street and suburb)? How many of you would participate? And how many more might participate?

This is a serious question.

I should add that the majority of OLO users - particularly people like R0bert, Vanilla, Foxy etc etc - participate here without abusing their anonymity.

Of course I have no problem with that, and I respect that they may feel more able to express themselves freely under a psudonym.

Rather, I'm talking about the small but extremely vocal and offensive minority who voice hateful and divisive vitriol under the cloak of anonymity. I think that people who want to express such ideas and sentiments should only be allowed to so so in public forums if they are willing to be identified with them.

Sorry Graham, our posts crossed :)

As you know, I'd be interested.