|
in reply to Re^2: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
in thread to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
So you want to de-anonymize them within the thread, which --in my book-- is taking away part of their anonymous robes. In a certain way, I am already anonymous by the use of my "handle" CountZero. If I should want to be really anonymous I simply do not log in and become the Anonymous Monk. It is unlikely that I then would want to be almost-but-not-entirely anonymous. This whole Anonymous Monk thing is like free speech: any restrictions just kill it.
CountZero A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James
|
Re^4: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
by ww (Archbishop) on Sep 29, 2011 at 20:32 UTC
|
| Does jenda's suggestion, at Re^2: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em, remove the basis for this objection?
Please, consider carefully, this is NOT -- IMO -- a restriction of any individual's right to annonymity*1; rather, it is an internal, encrypted (non-transparent) means to allow the individual to retain his/her annonymity, while allowing the rest of us to distinguish among AMs -- without in any wise knowing their actual identities .
*1 OK, conceeded: it might be viewed as a limit on a writer's ability to perform a (harmless and highly illustrative) jape such as appears well down, at Re^4: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em ...Re^3: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em, but I would (and do) argue that such a limit is insignificant, in as much as an alternate method (immediately below) to create the same illusion/illustation is readily available
Re^2: to distinguish between Anonymous Monks in a thread, brand 'em [id://123456]
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 31, 2011 at 09:11 GMT+5 |
| This is Comment 1. It's actually devoid of substantive content but is being extended (well beyond reason) in order to enhance this illusion -- namely, that this an an actual node. | reply
msg |
Re^3: to distinguish between Anonymous Monks in a thread, brand 'em [id://924823]
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 31, 2011 at 09:12 GMT+5 |
| Contradictory Comment 2 or "I don't agree that the above lacks substance. It appears to /me to contain in excess of 180 characters, some of them, perhaps, unique within that node and certainly not insubstatial." | reply
msg |
Re^3: to distinguish between Anonymous Monks in a thread, brand 'em [id://924823]
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 31, 2011 at 09:12 GMT+5 |
| Comment 3. The above completely lacks substance and is completely without any reference to Perl. Thus, I think it should be reaped immediately without recourse to consideration or voting. | reply
msg |
Re^3: to distinguish between Anonymous Monks in a thread, brand 'em [Re: 78/80 chars perl line still a meaningful rule
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 31, 2011 at 09:11 GMT+5 |
And besides, ww is all wet! H/She knows that any preference for an absolutist construction of freedom of speech in los Estados Unidos is subject to counter-construction by SCOTUS. For example, consider:
- one.
- TWO.
- Tres.
- der vierte!
| reply
msg |
|
| [reply] |
|
|
In my book --but YMMV-- anything which allows one to distinguish between one AM and another AM, takes away his anonymity. Whether this is between threads or inside threads only, makes no difference to me. I am already anonymous by using a self-chosen nickname here, so using the robes of AM has nothing to do with being linked to a real world physical person, but it takes this basic anonymity which we can all enjoy already to a next level. Distinguishing between AMs takes this ability away.
CountZero A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
|
Re^4: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 08, 2011 at 14:03 UTC
|
So you want to de-anonymize them within the thread, which --in my book-- is taking away part of their anonymous robes.
Its like coming in from the rain, your robes are wet, you're the Anonymous with wet robes in a room full of Anonymous
They'll dry soon enough
...almost-but-not-entirely anonymous.
All your base are belong to Anonymous Monk
Isn't the idea behind anonymity to hide your identity, not misrepresent your numbers?
This whole Anonymous Monk thing is like free speech: any restrictions just kill it.
And yet there exist limits on free speech , and they haven't killed it :)
CountZero A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James
| [reply] |
|
|
And yet there exist limits on free speech, and they haven't killed it That is what "they" try to make you believe ...
CountZero A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James
| [reply] |
|
|
