On Anonymity, Moderated Fora, and Usenet

On Jun 9, 6:13 pm, "Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote:
"Rich Ahrens" wrote in message

ouse.com...



on 6/9/2008 3:14 PM Maxwell said the following:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
. ..
Yes, by all means let's take a look at some of the advantages of an
unmoderated Usenet forum..........like this gem for example, posted
yesterday by some idiot posting here on this Usenet forum using a false
name.

"Dudley Henriques blithered dramatically whilst picking the gonad hairs
from his teeth once fluffy on the testicles of his retaded son "

Of course this Usenet moron has no idea that we just buried our son
after losing him to cancer.

Truly sorry to hear of your loss Dudley.

Kind of ironic that you and the person that said that, both sock puppet
for the same wannabe troll.

From my perspective, you must share some of the responsibility for the
sleezeball joining our group.

Truly sad.

If there were any doubt in anyone's mind whether you're a dickhead, you
just put it to rest once and for all.

And by virtue of the fact you are also a proud suckpuppet (or suck ass) for
Bertie. You must also share a good bit of the responsibility yourself.

In fact, I'd like to take the time to thank Bertie and all his sock puppets,
for the not only the cross posting, forging and lying that you all as a
group have sponsored to this forum, but also some of the world class filth
you have brought to the group as well.

This is not a forum.

But you are also not a man either, but merely a child trapped in a
man's body.

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 07:45:41 +0000 (UTC),
(Alan) wrote:

In article HARRY POTTER writes:

I come here to learn about aviation. Period. I'm not here to make friends,
I'm not here to make a name for myself, I'm just here to get a glimpse of
aviation that you just can't get reading published books.

I find that the better quality comments come from folks who are willing
to use their real names. They tend to stand behind what they say.

Don't think that anonymity makes you safe from the feds. If they
want you, they can find you.

Alan

nonsense. the better quality comments come from those with knowledge
and experience.

I've yet to find an anonymous poster who doesnt respond in an email
with real world details.

Stealth Pilot ( actually a contraction of a stupid claim made by our
ATC provider - that people who endanger others by not turning the
transponder on are the lowest of the low. my aircraft has never had a
transponder so I will always be a "CASA certified Stealth Pilot")

On Jun 9, 10:18 pm, HARRY POTTER wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote:
Michael wrote:
I'm seeing a lot of people leaving usenet quite publicly, in favor of
a moderated forum, because the signal to noise ratio on the group has
become so poor. This is of course their right and decision. I don't
intend to follow them, and that of course is mine. I will, however,
point out some major advantages of an unmoderated, anonymous forum -
like this one - for some of the topics we discuss.

Michael

Yes, by all means let's take a look at some of the advantages of an
unmoderated Usenet forum..........like this gem for example, posted
yesterday by some idiot posting here on this Usenet forum using a false
name.

"Dudley Henriques blithered dramatically whilst picking the gonad hairs
from his teeth once fluffy on the testicles of his retaded son "

Of course this Usenet moron has no idea that we just buried our son
after losing him to cancer.

If you can't take comments like that, then why do you post with your real
name on an unmoderated forum?

So pathetic as to make excuses for the behaviour of an ass?

Do you blame rape victims for the crime too? How about leaving your
car parked outside overnight? Is that 'asking' some lowlife dirtball
to come along and vandalize it? Where does personal accountability
fit into your world view?

It's folks with your mindset that create a society of immediate
gratification at the cost of long term good, i.e., if I want it then I
should have it...if I want to slam someone in a cowardly fashion, I
should do that too.

And he never said he couldn't take it.

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:04:50 -0700 (PDT), Michael
wrote:

the american constitution defends the right to free speech but I've
never heard of it defending the right to blather.

speech has the connotation of a well formed argument delivered orally.

blather on the other hand is rarely well formed.

Stealth Pilot

Michael wrote:
On Jun 9, 3:11 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Yes, by all means let's take a look at some of the advantages of an
unmoderated Usenet forum..........like this gem for example, posted
yesterday by some idiot posting here on this Usenet forum using a false
name.

There are no unalloyed benefits. Everything has a downside.

I'm going to take off on a tangent. There was a very good movie made
years ago - it was called Gideon's Trumpet. It was about the landmark
case, Gideon v. Wainwright, that established the precedent that the
accused was entitled to a lawyer, whether he could afford one or not.

It was made into a movie because it made a good morality story.
Gideon was innocent, but was wrongly convicted because he had no legal
counsel.

No movie will ever be made about Miranda v. Arizona, even though the
miranda rights against self-incrimination are perhaps more
fundamental. You see, Miranda was guilty as sin (and admitted it
later). He brutalized a little girl. And he went free.

I'm glad that the justices of the supreme court made the decision they
did - to limit the power and authority of the police to extract
confessions - even if that meant that in this one case, justice was
not done and a guilty man went free. Often it doesn't go that way.
The long term benefit of a freer society with more limited police
power is often hard to see in the short term - when an innocent person
is brutalized, and the offender remains unpunished. Hard cases make
bad law. But this time that didn't happen.

Of course my tangent was only marginally relevant. One can't really
compare the right not to incriminate oneself to the privilege of
speakig anonymously - and yet there is value to the analogy. In each
case we make a tradeoff between a more orderly community and a freer
one.

Whenever there is a freedom - any freedom, including the freedom to
post anonymously - it is a certainty that someone will abuse it.
There are those who believe that the solution is to create authority,
to create rules, to limit the freedom (in this case moderation) - and
thus limit the abuse. And then there are those who believe that rules
in general are a bad thing, and authority is not to be trusted. And
never the twain shall meet.

Those are the extremes, and as always there is a continuum between the
extremes. There is also a continuum of options online. There is a
level of authority - or anarchy - to suit any taste. Just don't
pretend that by increasing authority, you lose nothing. If you
consider the tradeoff acceptable - well, that's your choice.

Michael

Making the analogy for freedom vs authority has it's limitations when
used to profile Usenet vs Moderated forum structure. As always, the
devil is in the details :-)

Usenet is perhaps one of the ultimate tests of man's ability to
communicate freely with one another, unhampered by restraint. Even in
this wide open context, someone somewhere in the great cyber void
submitted a set of protocols for Usenet behavior, realizing that in any
cohesive society, some form of control is necessary.

So as each and every one of us enter the (as you say) free expression
world of Usenet, we are told up front and often how we will behave, and
exactly what is expected of us in the way of accepted protocols every
time we hit the keys of our computers and post something to Usenet.

I mention this only to emphasize the fact that even Usenet has it's
limitations, it's protocols, and indeed, it's moderation. The only
difference in this "authority" between Usenet and an officially
moderated forum is in how the moderation is applied.

It's nice that you consider Usenet to be a "free and open" method of
communication, and in effect, it should be exactly this, but when viewed
realistically, Usenet isn't as "free and open" as one might imagine at
first glance. Usenet has it's limitations. Granted, they are self
imposed limitations, but limitations none the less. You violate these
limitations and you will be "moderated" in short order, by many more
than the one moderator you will usually find on a moderated forum.

My point is that BOTH forms of forum are actually moderated venues.
You post something nasty on Usenet, the moderators (other posters) will
tear you apart. You post something nasty on a "moderated forum", and
you're history.

The ultimate choice of which venue is best is not solvable to a single
answer. If there is any answer at all to this issue, it has to be that
man, if left to govern himself and his interface with his fellow human
beings, will meet with partial success and have to pay a price for both
his failures and the failures of others. This is Usenet. This is what
you have called "freedom".

If man however, decides to do as man has done all over the world, and
allow his actions to be judged by another human being, man has entered
into the more structured environment that defines what man has decided
since time immemorial will be the standard by which man exists on the
planet; that being a structured society with it's corresponding
authority. This forms the venue we know as the "moderated forum".

I don't pretend to know which of these two venues best suits mankind.
As you say, each must find their own way. I've seen many successes on
Usenet and I believe man can function there if determined to follow the
protocols, but I don't see the protocols being followed; a fatal flaw in
the Usenet system; man's inability to govern himself.

On the other hand, allowing another to judge what can be said an not
said can have severe consequences as relates to loss of freedom of
expression since the ultimate decision on what can be expressed now lies
with another and not oneself.

It's interesting really, thinking about which venue best serves one's
needs.
Perhaps the ultimate answer is that man, left to his own devices, is
incapable of sustained human relationship without authority. Perhaps for
us all, it will boil down to re-writing "The Lord of the Flies" :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote:


Of course this Usenet moron has no idea that we just buried our son
after losing him to cancer.



My heartfelt sympathy. I know firsthand what cancer does to its victims
and their family.

Michael schrieb:
The email address I post with goes nowhere - literally. There is no
such domain anymore.

there could be within seconds. And then you're using that domain.

There was always too much spam in it, and
sometimes I would get sucked into pointless discussions with the
clueless ones who would email me there. Thus I decided that if
someone wanted to get hold of me, well, it was certainly easy enough
without maintaining that address. Works fine.

on your end, maybe. but this is not good 'netcitizenship'.

Michael

#m

romeomike wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote:


Of course this Usenet moron has no idea that we just buried our son
after losing him to cancer.



My heartfelt sympathy. I know firsthand what cancer does to its victims
and their family.
Thank you. I appreciate your post.

--
Dudley Henriques

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:


He's still around, BTW. if you feel the need to push his buttons. He was
even more entertaining than Maxie!

Even got his own honorary group.
alt.fan.beavis-and-basshole


Bertie

Glad you could stop by Bertie, and firm up the working relationship between
you and Dudley for all to see. Now is a good time to advertise that you BOTH
like to make sport of deliberately pushing someone's buttons.

Cool! But then all the smart ones already knew it. Nice reminder, very
timely.

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...

I'm really at a total loss as to how to answer this question from you. If
I thought you actually cared about our loss and wanted to know I would
gladly discuss my son with you. I'm sorry but the trust just isn't there
between us for me to take the chance.

--
Dudley Henriques

How old was he Dudley, and when did he pass? Hardly a discussion.

I wonder why you wouldn't want anyone to know?