in reply to Re^3: Spam! Spam! Spam! Spam!
in thread Spam! Spam! Spam! Spam!

  1. You once again demonstrate that you have either have a very short memory; or a very selective one.

    I recall -- but cannot be bothered to look up -- someone posting a long list of other sites that allow anonymous posters -- in direct reply to one of your previous assertions of this myth.

    You should by now be very aware that this isn't going to happen; so why keep flogging that dead horse?

  2. I learned early on here that looking to change the way this place works is a forlorn hope.

    The possibility of change is in the purview of those with neither the time to make major changes; nor the willingness to allow other to do so.

    Get over it; or use those skills you claim and write your own forum. Do a good job and maybe you'll attract many converts.

  3. Probably your worst idea to date. (And quite a turn around from the man who was decrying the possibility of "author-based consideration" just a couple of days ago.)

    And no, the idea holds no appeal for me. I have no special privileges here -- I long ago turned down the possibility of joining the inner sanctum -- and I prefer that it stay that way. One man; one opinion; one vote per expression of it.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

In Section Perl Monks Discussion