🚀 go-pugleaf

In the previous article, Ken Prox  <kprox@wwnet.net> wrote:
> > So someone who conceals his name with an obviously bogus alias is
> > morally superior to someone who makes up a real-sounding name and
> > uses that?  I might agree, but it's irrelevant from the standpoint
> > of assessing an individual's credibility -- you have no way of
> > verifying the actual name of a poster, including mine, as I have no
> > way of verifying yours.
> 
> I would not consider that person morally superior. But if I met a
> used car salesman and they introduced themselves with a false name
> (assuming the real name was known), it would raise some questions
> regarding the product they were selling.
> 
> I don't see NG's being that much different, with information being
> the product. You have sparked my curiosity on the topic.

A used car salesman is seeking to perform a financial transaction --
and a significant one -- with you.  Someone on a newsgroup merely
wants to exchange ideas.  Given that the ideas are independent of
one's identity in 99.999% of cases, who really cares?

I'm sympathetic to your point of view -- there's just something innate
in us that reacts badly to someone who conceals his identity.  I'm
just saying that if you step back and look at it coldly and
rationally, it really is irrelevant.

> Not so much in this NG, but net abuse always seems to stem from
> individuals that post anonymously. It's a license for non
> accountability and personl threats.

Depending what you mean by "net abuse," I disagree.  I've seen plenty
perpetrated by people who were posting under their real identities,
including some cases where I have a high degree of confidence (because
of some kind of corroborating evidence) that those really *were* their
real names.

And even if we stipulate the truth of the proposition, it doesn't
matter.  You can't reason bacwards this way.  It's as if you noted
that, since a disproportionate amount of crime is committed by blacks,
black people should always be regarded, by default, as criminals.  I
forget the formal name for the fallacy, and I'm too lazy just now to
look it up.
-- 
  _+_ From the catapult of |If anyone disagrees with any statement I make, I
_|70|___:)=}- J.D. Baldwin |am quite prepared not only to retract it, but also
\      /  baldwin@panix.com|to deny under oath that I ever made it. -T. Lehrer
***~~~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------