The uses of anonymity

[hilary]

I left the anonymous posting option intact in the Friends' Area so that vulnerable people could share their readings and ask for help without giving a name. And once in a while, it's used for exactly that - or by a regular member asking for help incognito. It would be a shame to lose it.

But it is also being used as cover for some poisonously vicious sniping. People who lack the courage to put their names to their words, spitting venom at those who dare to do so. I hope very much that they will either grow backbones in a hurry, or slither back under whatever rock they came from.

Of course, it's in the nature of anonymous posting that we can either have all or nothing.

Remove the anonymous posting option from Friends?

35 changing to 23. No prizes for recognising the rodents stealing and spoiling the harvest. But a bit worrying that they are still scuttling about even after the 'anon' option is removed. I suppose we might end up with a mass of Anon2 through Anon98.

Leave it in?
18 changing to 2. Trying, at least, to deal with the mess through complete openness. I think the lines give a favourable view of this option, though it's not in the least what I feel like doing.

I could do with some helpful thoughts here, especially from anyone who isn't too infuriated too see straight... (I need an emoticon for 'tired, rueful grin', too.)

[bradford_h]

Hi Hilary-
Just my two pence.
I personally won't reply to an anonymous poster unless the issue looks sensitive enough to warrant anonymity or the response looks like it will help others to understand the Yi.
What kind of Community is it where half of the members are in hiding?
I think you are right to limit the use of this option.
brad

[candid]

Boards and chatrooms are always subject to the lowest common denominator: personal warfare. Eliminating the Anon option could at least deter the hipshot response from some, but if the root or core is corrupt, decay will find a way back into the system.

Its not always an easy or definitive line which separates legitimate argument from malicious sniping, and one can often lead to the other.

Still, if personal comments are excluded altogether we can wind up with a sterile environment devoid of human emotion.

I don't know. Anything I say further could be construed as telling others how to live their lives, how to behave. Its become pretty sensitive around here lately.

While I've understood the confidentiality factor, I've never been a fan of the Anon option. Doing away with it won't have everyone singing "all you need is love," but it might deter some of the sniping.

There are no laws or government which can prevent criminal activities, and restricting human rights too severely causes rebellion. In order for peace and order to prevail the hearts of the people must desire peace and order. That is up to the people, not the government.

[heylise]

Is Anon1 through to 99 not anonymous enough? Yes, they would have to sign in, but I think, Hilary gave enough reason for trusting her discretion. And if someone does not trust Hilary, I don't think any visit here will be very useful.
I am not even sure, if Hilary herself knows about everyone who has signed in.

Anon78 will still be anonymous, but Anon34 will not be scolded for the misbehaving of 78. So I think, it is even for anons better to have some difference among them.

Personally, I would be in favor of removing the anonymous option. I don't think it diminishes anyone's freedom or so.

LiSe

[lenardthefast]

How about reserving 'Anon 01-99 for questions ONLY, no interpersonal commentary, just questions and clarification, if needed, of THEIR question, period. I believe that if someone is vulnerable and/or shy about communicating with 'strangers' then perhaps Anon is OK, but we have been seeing very personal and snide broadsides issuing from some of the Anons and to me that is just a form of cowardice, not vulnerability. I see no reason whatsoever for someone to ANSWER a question (from another querent), or comment on ANYTHING other than THEIR own question whilst disguised under the Anon label.

Personally, I... well, forget what I personally think about people who post anonymously. I am too infuriated to go there.

Namaste,
Leonard

[dharma]

i personally don't care for the anonymous feature myself. it has been abused more often than not. i say begin by eliminating the Anonymous function first. of course, there will always be someone sliding in through some hidden loop-hole but let's not get ahead of ourselves here. don't let that be the reason why we don't act on this.

it would help tremendously Hilary if you made it impossible to sign-up as a member unless one passed by you first. i've encountered this type of regulation before on other boards and found that they encountered much fewer problems in this regard. i know it would mean more work for you but there is no other way to deal with this sort of thing.

if our front-gate remains perpetually open and unlocked some will view it as an open invitation for anything and everything. if you don't take the bull by the horns and steer it where you want it to go it will charge at it's own discretion and you really can't blame the bull for finding the gate open.

bottom line, i don't mind having my words challenged but i don't want to talk with people who are unable to own up to their opinions and judgments. i want to talk with people who are capable of taking responsibility for their words and who have the courage to be seen and recognized as a "singular" person with some semblence of a background, not the multiple personalities of a few members throwing their voices around like this was their own private circus show.

[hilary]

I think I'd better sleep on this one, in the hope of getting some brains back tomorrow in exchange for today's cotton wool.

Here is half a thought... not at all sure if it would work out...

What if... people had to check with me first before taking an 'Anon' username. Existing members who want to go incognito could open a second account, of course. I would know who was who, and would have the option of doing something (sending warning emails, banning, whatever - oh dear, oh dear) if the privilege of anonymity was abused. Then someone has to decide what constitutes 'abuse', of course. Here we go again... hasn't anybody seen my brains?

Candid is absolutely right that the atmosphere here depends on the members. This is the original self-moderating forum. It can't be turned into a 'nice' place (I know how much LiSe wants one of those http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/wink.gif) by some silly ass moderator inventing rules.

Can anyone - or no-one, if he or she is around - think of a good reason to keep the 'post as anonymous' option?

[candid]

I personally like "nice", but I also understand what LiSe's saying about not primping it up in pretty bows, and to keep it human and genuine.. but also civil.

I can't think of a reason for the Anon option. Not really. Someone can always invent a new handle, whether for genuine reasons or ingenuine, but as I've said, it may at least deter shooting from the hip.

Please rest. This site will survive. It always has, and so have the members that have hung in with it, and with each other.

[cheiron]

A thought.

What about having a ?strictly divination questions and answers? area ? Let any who are asking a question be anonymous but, please, not the respondents?

Possibly also a Yijing exploration and ideas discussion area. But strictly for explorations and discussion of the Yijing. No anonymous at all. But pseudonyms to protect the shy along the lines of the posts above?

Open space ? No anons and all chat and non Yijing stuff there? nowhere else?

Maybe a need for another area to discuss non Yijing but related topics?

Of course it would only help if folk shifted to another room to go off topic.

Uncertainly floating this about, but recognising that Hilary is the skipper.

--Kevin

[bradford_h]

Hi Hilary-
I wouldn't ban anonymity entirely. Just restrain its use. And encourage posters to think their thoughts through before signing them.
Several of the members write to me off forum (which is usually welcome) and I've seen the reasons why some have posted anonymously on occasion, like when I hear the problem in a little more detail. Some troubles are not for broadcasting. Some problems want more trust and confidence than others. Confidentiality is a big part of counseling and counseling is big part of the Yi. Anonymity can allow someone to provide a lot more detail, which in turn helps to hone our skills as diviners, which I think is the intent of this forum.
So while I don't think that spouting anonymous opinions should be all that welcome, I do see the need for a safe space in which to ask a few humble questions.
b

[lenardthefast]

Hilary,

My vote is "Please DON'T keep it!

Namaste,
Leonard

[candid]

There?s something else here that?s missing, something we too often overlook. How many with real needs and real interest pass by without ever asking their questions, or never bothering to offer their own insights because of infighting? Seems to me there?s a responsibility we bear to minimize that. This URL is just too prominent on search engines to believe that even half of those who surf through bother to stay long. If we try to put ourselves in their place, would we stick around? Would you? I don?t know if I would.

There?s two errors, as I see it. One is to form too tight a group, which comes off as an impenetrable clique to anyone outside the group. And two, to be un-unified as a community, which appears as just another chaotic chat forum full of big egos with too much time on our hands.

I believe we bear responsibility. More so for those who have more invested in Yi. If we receive teaching from Yi, then we ought to try and conduct this Yi forum according to the principles of the teacher. We owe that much.

[cheiron]

Oh, Candid - YES

This way let us grow as a community.

--Kevin