Should we disallow anonymous posts?

[sek]

G'day all, Well I've read some of these posts and so far the yes's are waaay in front!!!. I however vote NO.

This forum is suppose to be 'public'. By introducing a ban on annonymous guests could turn this excellent site into some sort of 'exclusive club' and posssibly stifle a broader range of ideas. What are we are afraid of ?. These individuals I assume can't yet jump down your cable and bite you? Can they? Sure there are some 'nutters' out there. You deal with them accordingly. But as some people may call others 'nutty', another bunch of people may call them 'geniuses'. I mean just imagine if JB was an anonymous guest/pest alive here today on this website. Didn't JC's book in effect say he had a foul temper and many thought he was repungent. What sort of ramblings and jibber might he have thrown at us today in 2004? My mind boggles as to think as to how his posts might have read!! LOL. If we had forced him to become a member against his wishes and then he said "stick it" and decided to keep quiet, imagine what we would have been forgoing if he was 'the one'? We all want to see this riddle solved quickly and not be wasting too much time going about it! Remember! We are all chasing the 'holy grail' of physics, so, we definitely need a broad spectrum of lateral thinkers to be involved without the "No Hat, No Entry" policy I think.

This freedom of choice must remain in this forum. It must always be their choice to become a member or not. I am a member because I choose to be. If Joe Bloggs wishes to remain anonymous, he should also be allowed to be.
We must also never stifle freedom of speech or vigorous debate either. I must stress though that freedom of speech should always come with some responsibility, such as good manners and fellow respect. Unfortunately, this will never always be the case. We are after all only human. We can't always get on with everyone, and in a way that's what makes life so interesting!! (and sometimes entertaining of course!!! )

Each of us must decipher/ scrutinise the content of our fellow's writings and then do with it according to one's own belief system. If you think something written is 'rubbish' say so. If you think it's 'great' say so. If you think they are lurkers, shadowy or fruitcakey then say so!. But we should all try to respond in a responsible way. If anyone goes overboard and breaks common decency rules then the moderator I assume has the right to 'kick butt' and banish accordingly. So lets keep it a 'fair go' for everyone.!!
Please, don't turn this tremendous 'open' forum into a 'private' club. You may disagree and that"s okay. Bye.

P.S I will still support the (democratic) majority vote.

[scott]

Hi sek,

Thanks a lot for your remarks. I'm glad to see someone weigh in for the underdog here! As you know, this is not an easy decision for me to make. I was going to make the change today, but since you posted, I will hold off until I feel that the points you raised have been adequately addressed.

Here is my response to a few of your (excellent) points:

This forum is suppose to be 'public'. By introducing a ban on annonymous guests could turn this excellent site into some sort of 'exclusive club' and posssibly stifle a broader range of ideas.

I think it is important to note that all this change will do is require posters to have a valid email address. Granted, this might exclude a few people. But free email addresses are easy enough to come by... I don't think an email requirement is raising the bar too high.

What are we are afraid of ?

Personally, I have noticed a trend where people will use the guest account to post rude and offensive remarks that they might not have posted otherwise. As moderator, this is a problem for me.

I mean just imagine if JB was an anonymous guest/pest alive here today on this website ... What sort of ramblings and jibber might he have thrown at us today in 2004?

You're right! I guess I would just hope that JB would be willing to get an email address!

If Joe Bloggs wishes to remain anonymous, he should also be allowed to be.

I agree. But I don't think that this change will preclude anonymity. If Joe Bloggs wishes to remain anonymous, all he has to do is come up with a fake username and choose not to enable his email button.

If anyone goes overboard and breaks common decency rules then the moderator I assume has the right to 'kick butt' and banish accordingly.

This is the key point that has caused me change my mind recently. The problem is that as moderator, I have no control over guest posts at all. I can only ban real accounts. Plus, I cannot even really admonish guests for offensive posts because they can just claim innocence or disappear, only to return later with a different name to cause more trouble.

Requiring registration will not solve this problem, but I think it will raise the bar just a little on rude and inane behavior on the board. It will be a little more work for someone to maintain multiple registered identities (although I'm sure some people will still do it! Why? I have no idea...)

On a personal note, sometimes I feel like I'm managing a bunch of kindergarteners! I'm hoping that this change will just make my job a little easier.

Just my $0.02.

Thanks again sek and keep those comments coming, everyone!
-Scott

[John Collins]

Scott, in the light of various posts can I change my vote to a no, no anonymous posts? My reasons are as outlined in some posts. I now don't think that anyone with anything to offer will be put off by having to register.

The possible loss of a useful comment by an anonymous poster must be outweighed by the inevitable anonymous posts containing off-topic excess verbiage of dubious value. Anyone with a constructive comment will surely register if only to get public recognition of his input.

John.

[Fletcher]

Hi Scott,

Just a little house keeping. I light of John's previous post I have to admit to 'momemtary distraction' (translation - hand eye co-ordination failure) & hit the no button by mistake. So that probably means only 3 of the 5 want anonymous posting.

Fletch

[scott]

I think the banning of anonymous posts is already starting to have a positive effect before it is implemented! It is great to see new posts from people who sense the feeling of genuine comraderie that exists here.

I think you're right, Patrick!

I'm on the verge of disabling guest posts... If there are any other objectors out there, speak now or forever hold your peace...

Considering that most of the world considers perpetual movers to be 'unbalanced', it's great to have a place of candid discussion for those that are open to the possibilities Bessler demonstrated.

Thanks Patrick. For me, hearing remarks like that makes it all worth it. :-)
-Scott

[ovyyus]

Hi Scott,

I think that while sek does raise some good points, he perhaps misses the real function of the register to post system - moderation.

Take as one example the Keelynet.com discussion board. Jerry Decker only allows registered users to post to his board - as do most other discussion boards at escribe.com and elsewhere. The reason is that Jerry can boot off anyone who is simply posting to cause trouble, or pushing a personal agenda, or advertising inappropriately.

Anyone can get a free email address and concoct a fake ID - having to register to post will obviously not stop the fruitcakes. All this change will do is allow you to deal with problems if/when they arise. At present you have no control at all and anyone could post anything they wish - political, porn, inapproriate links, you name it - anything.

I think it is only a matter of time before you will have to make this change anyway, it is inevitable, moderation is required, resistance is futile :)

[scott]

Yes, Bill, that was the main point I tried to make in my reply to sek as well.

And I know that you're right about the inevitability. It is amazing to me that I have operated this board wide open to the whole world for more than 3 years now, and have never had a serious problem with pornography or spam (although there have been isolated incidents).

-Scott

BTW: I have tried for years to get Jerry Decker to add a link to this site on Keelynet, but he never responds to my emails. :-(

[grim]

Hi Scott

I originally voted "I don't care" because the board belongs to you as administrator, and since my purpose is research either way things went nothing would change on this end. But the more thought given, please change my vote to "Yes".

There are a lot of sites out there that link to here as a source of historical info on Bessler, including skeptic sites. You have both modern authors of anything on JB registered here, as well as a fellow who has taken on the painstaking task of drawing out MT diagrams. You have some serious researchers, and a real good site with this board.

There's nothing wrong with a sense of humor, but some of the posts on here have been vicious, demeaning and downright hateful, a whole different mentality. I envy your patience in dealing with some of these.
As you said, sometimes it's like running a kindergarten. But you can't just let kindergartners run amok and still maintain the mission of serious research.

Best regards


grim

[ovyyus]

Hi Scott,

BTW: I have tried for years to get Jerry Decker to add a link to this site on Keelynet, but he never responds to my emails. :-(

JD's just jealous that we've out-fringed him. It's rough surviving out on the fringe of the fringe. Or is it the fringe of the fringe of the fringe... :)

[Guest]

G'day to all. What a good response! The main reason for my last post was simply to try and even up the score.

I do agree with ovyyus (Hi ovy!), that moderation is important. I just hope this isn't a knee- jerk reaction due to a bad egg or two within the 'open' discussion. Is it my understanding that the moderator/s can't really 'police' the persistent bad onions whichever way the discussion group goes anyway? Is this correct? If however, forcing memberships helps reduce 'problem' posters then fine, but, also think of this. What has made this website different to others? I think it has been it's main focus of open invitation to ALL (guests, members, skeptics, dabblers etc...) who are fascinated with the bessler phenonomen. It appears that no matter what entry system is ultimately introduced, some bogies will still get in. (I haven't and I hope never see any porn here though!!!).

My concern therefore is this. If by changing the rules of engagement within this good discussion group is to try and limit the tiny no. of persistent baddies which it seems it mightn't (good as it might be), could it indeed be ultimately counter-productive and undermine Besslerwheel.com's main drive of gathering and sharing lateral ideas by all individuals or groups, who wish to be members or otherwise. I read some posts where others think they should have no problem in registering if they are geniune JB enthusiasts. Perhaps they DO have a problem in registering. In the perfect world it would be nice if everyone who comes here would register everytime. But in the quest of keeping out a few rogues, perhaps many other good guests who insist on remaining anonymous may simply side-step this important website all together. They should be able to become members when they feel comfortable and ready to do so, NOT, when others say they should. They may still contribute something vital as an anonymous guest!. Don't get me wrong!. Being a member is important and maybe it has greater benefits. Perhaps Scott might introduce some kind of incentives for guests to join sooner rather than later. Just an idea. At the end of the day I guess it will be up to the moderator and the majority vote.

I like this website because it has always made all people feel welcome!
Just my thoughts. You may disagree and thats okay. Bye.

EDIT- I will still support the final decision.

[sek]

Hi all, I dont know what I did wrong, but I want you all to know it was me sorry. sek.

[Sevich]

Scott, Would a 3 Month trial be OK?

[scott]

Well, it's probably time to wrap this topic up. Thanks to everyone for sharing your thoughts and ideas. You've been very helpful.

When we adjust the votes (a lot of waffling on this one!) they come out like this:

Code: Select all

Jan 15, 2004  ~9:30pm MST

Yes           87%  [ 20 ]
No            13%  [ 3 ]
I don't care   0%  [ 0 ]

Total votes:  23

Pretty compelling to me, so...

At 10:00 pm MST tonight, I will disable guest posting on the board.

Note that I did not say that I will disable anonymous posting.

I think this is an important distinction that came up in the discussion. In fact, I now regret that I phrased the name of this topic using the word "anonymous" rather than "guest."

I think the distinction is important because I truly believe that disallowing guest posting is not the same as disallowing anonymous posting. With a free email address and a fake username, a person will be able to post just as anonymously after this change as they can now using the guest account.

The only difference moving forward will be that all posters will be held to the same standard. Disallowing guest posts will only create a disincentive for people to waste other people's time by posting messages with which they are unwilling to claim association. And that will make my job easier. :-)

To address some of sek's concerns, let me say this:

• The discussion board is, always has been, and will remain open to everyone. Previously, "everyone" meant everyone with a computer, an Internet connection, and a willingness to share the ip address they're posting from. Now, an email address will also be required. This is still a very low barrier to entry.
• The purpose of the discussion board is, always has been, and will remain to gather and share lateral ideas by all individuals, of any persuasion, who are interested in the Bessler phenomenon.
• After this change, no one will be required to sacrifice his or her anonymity in order to post. But, after this change, all users will be held accountable for what they post.

Best wishes and good luck to all. Keep up the search and keep posting!
-Scott

[Jonathan]

How do you make those bullets? I assume it has to do with the "List" and "List=" buttons when you post, but how are they differnet? And yes, I have hovered over them with the cursor to see what they are, but I don't understand what the difference is between a "List" and an "Ordered list". Does it just put it however it wants if you don't tell it that the order matters? That would be rediculus...

[terry5732]

I voted yes.

To those who wish to not register - it doesn't matter. THEY will find you whether you register or not!

We are not alone.