An Anonymous Forum

u heard me

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Users who have been banned from this discussion board only to return under a new screen name skate on very thin ice, and would do well to not arouse any suspicions. Of course, this clearly doesn't apply to anyone here.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

this is the last thing we need.

 

Says the guy who seems to really like guessing who I am. Why not just make it so that the admins can know if necessary? Come to think of it, this particular account is essentially anonymous and the admins certainly have the leverage to find out who it is if things go wrong- tell or else- and there is a built in safety feature- -one- person always knows who whoamI? is, the last person who was in that role. But the truth is, I think I'm going to miss being anonymous when someone finally guesses who I am. So I like the idea of an anonymous forum, where people can use a registered sock puppet (that is, you have to have a non banned name to have one of these and it would need to be given if there were ever any trouble or the sock puppet would be banned). But only in that forum and if an admin ever felt that the person was going out of bounds, the admin could force the person to reveal to them their true identity or just get rid of the sock puppet.

 

That depends does it not... afterall, i had created a different account whilst still using my original account (hence no bans), and yet, you, yourself and Irene acted like it was the end of the world with sciforums crashing in a big rip.

 

I too would like an apology.

 

Classic james.

 

What to do when the Doctor and Head Admin fight? Wait for The Mediator (tm) to appear ;-))

Let's see- James wants an apology for Lou Natic's accusation of poll rigging. Given the fact that that the doctor has not given any evidence to back up his assertion, I believe that such an apology is warranted.

Lou Natic sidestepped the issue, however, by countering that he too deserved an apology. Personally, this wouldn't have been my tactic- generally better to apologize if one has done something wrong and perhaps mention that you too are deserving of an apology afterwards. I believe another flaw in his strategy is that he has not specified what he'd like an apology for, however; so Dr., what's the complaint?

 

I just would like one is all. They feel nice.

 

I... see

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Well doctor, you're fairly good at making me laugh, I must admit

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

 

Alrighty people, let's present some constructive ideas! (because after 5 pages not many were presented):

First of all, I like the idea!! What would be the point of it? Well, for one we already know most of the posters with 1000+ posts, so if I see a post from X, I might resent the post out of hand without reading it, knowing his/her stand on most issues. The second advantage would be taking positions against one's usual viewpoints. I had an alterego here, the Logical Republican, when I played a viewpoint quite different from my own. But those who knew me got the picture and might viewed the effort as a joke. With full anonimity this would be much easier, thus a Muslim could argue for atheism and such...

How would this work? Quite easily. In these special threads posters would be identified by let say letters (first poster called A, second B,etc.) so every thread when there is a conversation we still know who is saying what. BUT! In a separate thread poster C would/could be different (it means he/she is just the 3rd responder in that thread) than the other threads. Since most serious discussions don't have more than 26 participants, 26 letters would do it for starters, if not numbers or doubling up the letters could do it...

I don't expect this idea to take off, but I still think it is an interesting one!

As an experience at least, we should try it...

P.S.: As a 3rd advantage, it would be fun to try to guess who is who, although certain posters are easy to recognize...

 

There could be restrictions, like only posters with 500+ posts could participate or such. All other rules would apply, so yes, you could get banned for posting anonymously

 

To be perfectly honest I don't think any Administrator has rigged this poll, I can't however say the same about members and their Socks (Both of them).

 

Voting No is not the same as voting Yes, because those who don't want to participate in such threads, well, then they just don't have to participate in them!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

In short, it is not their business. This vote is similar to asking: Do we need subforum X? If enough people vote yes, obviously there is a demand for it, no matter how many people voted no.

Fucking DUH!

 

Hardly logical, Some people won't vote "No" because they couldn't care less about the topic. If they thought that their vote mattered they might actually vote "No" undermining any number in regards to demand.

At the end of the day, it matters not what a vote tallies, but whether implementation will ever be given the go ahead. This might or might not be the case for a number of reasons, so don't blame me if you are left hanging in the wind.

 

How many mods are there? Like 15?
I can see all of them voting no.

In most of the open polls, for board issues, virtually halve the votes come from mods. It's like no one else really cares. I know I don't.

 

I am a realist and already said I don't expect any changes, it would require too much of rewriting of the code.

About numbers. Do we need a Psychedelic subforum? Even if 200 people vote No, when 30 people want to discuss the topic, it should be created, no matter what the majority said.

Oh wait, that already happened to the Sport forum (aka Health)

P.S.: I noticed you didn't argue against my arguments (advantages of an anonymus forum).

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So you're genuinely ignoring the possibility that some people think it's just a bad idea?