in reply to Re: Re: No Anonymous Reply Option
in thread No Anonymous Reply Option

why could he not post as bluebell?

I'm sure he could. And, he could post his next node as redbell, and a followup as tinkerbell. The following day he could post as libertybell, bellcurve, and bigben (well, that last one might be a little close to home for tilly, and best avoided.)

In other words, when someone uses a registered account, he is doing so for his own convenience, not yours.

Having an Anonymous Monk account is also a convenience. It is convenient for people that want to post anonymously. It is convenient for people that just stop by and don't want to register an account. It's also a convenient way to reduce the number of orphaned accounts.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: No Anonymous Reply Option
by AcidHawk (Vicar) on Nov 24, 2003 at 05:40 UTC

      It's also a convenient way to reduce the number of orphaned accounts

    Then how do you explain

  • 5068 - Users Never Logged in
  • 12846 - Logged In Once, No Write Ups

    • out of a possible 25763 total users. (i.e. more than half of the total users seem to be orphaned users..? In fact only 7849 users who have contributed..?)

    -----
    Of all the things I've lost in my life, its my mind I miss the most.
[reply]
      i.e. more than half of the total users seem to be orphaned users..?

      I said it was a convenient way to reduce the number of orphaned users, not eliminate them. I suspect that ratio would be much worse if Anonymonk didn't exist.

      -sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";
[reply]
        The suggestion was made to prevent posts of AM in *some* threads. Noone suggested AM can't *read* posts. The 17914 users mentioned by AcidHawk never posted - I fail to see how that number will increase if AM can't post in some threads.

        Abigail

[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

In Section Perl Monks Discussion