in reply to Re^12: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
in thread to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em

Seems to me that their '"indistinguishableness"' -- at the level you're invoking it as something to protect -- is not and never has been the point of permitting individuals to post as AM nor is it an essential element of anonymity in the context of the Monastery.

Rather, the point, IMO, is to allow any persons to post what they wish, without providing any link between their statement (opinion, rant, slurs, facts, code, whatever) and their actual personal identities or, as you suggested earlier, any link between the statement and the writer's individual semi-anonymous handle (CountZero, ww, etc.) But AM is not an individual handle; it's used by many different (but equally anonymous) individuals*1.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
*1 ....or so we may presume, given the varying competence with Perl, English, spelling, grammar, and so on that we can readily observe.
  • Comment on Re^13: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^14: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
by CountZero (Bishop) on Oct 05, 2011 at 06:08 UTC
    It is clear, my definition of "anonymity" is more extreme than yours. I do not claim mine is best or the only right one. It is just the one I think fits the situation best.

    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]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion