Re: No Anonymous Reply Option

Let's make one point clear. The proposal was not to eliminate all monks, but to disallow anonymous replies to ones own posting.

People can still post a million times without fear of losing XP, they just can't anonymously insult someone who wants not to have anonymous replies. You still can have 'fun' with the anonymous monks - perhaps they can make it a user option that you are blissfully unaware of postings marked "non- anonymous replies", so there's no reason for you to leave Perlmonks. (But tolerance? Here? I don't think this place is very tolerant - just look at this thread for instance). As for anonymous monk teasing, well, I haven't seen much 'teasing'. Insults, yes. Teasing? Nope. Besides, only cowards tease anonymously. And yes, some anonymous posts are brilliant, but some non-anonymous posts are as well. Being anonymous isn't necessary to post a brilliant article.

If you don't want to read the anonymous posts, ignore them.

Well, that's what the request is about, isn't? Ignoring anonymous posts.

Abigail

Comment on Re: No Anonymous Reply Option

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: No Anonymous Reply Option by woolfy (Chaplain) on Nov 25, 2003 at 00:03 UTC
Well, that's what the request is about, isn't? Ignoring anonymous posts. No, it was not about ignoring them, but about making it completely impossible to reply anonymously to a node. The next step might be to make it completely impossible to be anonymous. Which I would not like. I think this site is very tolerant, of which this thread is a good example: it is polite, substantial, humorous, informative. No insults. As for anonymous monk teasing, well, I haven't seen much 'teasing'. Insults, yes. Teasing? Nope. Besides, only cowards tease anonymously. No teasing? Oh?. Your threshold for considering something an insult might be a bit lower than mine. I think "coward" is a very big word, somewhat insulting. And regarding insults or demeaning stuff, let the innocent ones throw the first stone, brick, pebble, rock (lets not do a menhir). And yes, some anonymous posts are brilliant, but some non-anonymous posts are as well. Being anonymous isn't necessary to post a brilliant article. So? The Worst Nodes of all time contains no posts of anonymous monks (neither does Best Nodes of all time). You don't have a point here. Too much fuss about anonimity. Really.	[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re: Re: No Anonymous Reply Option by Anonymous Monk on Nov 24, 2003 at 16:08 UTC
Well, that's what the request is about, isn't? Ignoring anonymous posts. No. The request is about dictating which monks can reply. I can easily see artist requesting later on that only teabag, jZed, JPaul (I just picked these names from the chatterbox)... monks be allowed to respond to his questions.	[reply]
Re: Re: No Anonymous Reply Option by CukiMnstr (Deacon) on Nov 24, 2003 at 15:29 UTC
Well, that's what the request is about, isn't? Ignoring anonymous posts. He does not want to ignore them, but disallow them. There's a difference.	[reply]