Deep Thought of the Day
This is Delaware Liberal, where liberal moderators post articles or links that may be of interest to other liberals in or around Delaware.
About the Author (Author Profile)
A Dad, a husband and a data guruComments (112)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Sites That Link to this Post
- Done — Down With Absolutes! | February 19, 2009
Wingnuts that are gluttons for punishment are welcome to bring their weak shit.
What about the Fairness Doctrine?
LOL!
I think that the Delaware blogosphere should know about this:
During the last 36 hours, my anonymous Internet identity was stolen by anonymous blog commentators at DownWithAbsolutes.com, and with the assistance and encouragement of DownWithAbsolutes.com, dozens of bogus comments ranging from the ridiculous to the threatening were posted using my name.
Internet identity thieves are among the most deservedly reviled people in the Internet. They destroy trust. In the small blogosphere of Delaware, if people did what DWA did for any reason, the whole system of relationships would fall apart because underneath the disagreements and attacks is an understanding that you don’t steal other people’s identities, anonymous or not, for any reason, particularly to slander them because you don’t like their comments.
And then to knowingly allowing bogus comments making threats is just beyond the pale.
Mike Matthews, owner of DWA, fully supported the theft of my identity and posting of bogus posts because he wrote that my posts were “shameful”, he doesn’t like my “particular brand of liberalism” and I characterize people as “bigots and other ridiculous, histrionic name”. He therefore feels that “I deserve it”.
Furthermore, if you read the thread where this started (Breathtaking Double Standards (Part II), it is pretty clear from content, writing style, and motive that the initial thief is another well-known Delaware blogger.
I don’t recall any other Delaware blog or blogger that knowingly and deliberately participated in an act of identity theft of this magnitude. This is an egregious breech of trust and I think that it is important for the Delaware blogging community to know about what just happened at DownWithAbsolutes.com, and to understand that anybody can be subject to identity theft there by virtually any other commentator, and if the people at DWA don’t like you or your comments, then they will encourage and support it.
If you want to protect your moniker you have to log in.
Anonone,
It seems to me that Matthews could easily check the IP Addresses to see if they are the same or not. For him not to do so because he disagrees with your politics is the worst and most disgusting form of censorship, and that is ironic coming from a self righteous lecturer who never passes on the opportunity to look down upon us here at Delaware Liberal when we banned Mike W or moderated Burris.
Shorter anonone: Whaaaaa!!! Whaaaaa!! I can make shit up about people, but when they fuck with me, Mike Matthews should step in. Whaaa!!! Whaaa!!!
DelDem,
Don’t get all sanctimonious on me, OK? Anonone is one step above a troll. He constantly comes on these silly blogs and misrepresents and mischaracterizes peoples’ opinions. Because someone may have a differing opinion than him, he begins lobbing missiles like “bigot!” and “racist.”
Case in point: Some fucker having a laugh decided to “impersonate” pandora. I didn’t catch on at first because, sorry, I don’t spend my life looking at IP addresses. I got an email from the real pandora (y’know, the one who people know as a REAL person who isn’t afraid to OUT herself at public gatherings) asking me to correct the matter and I kindly did. Because I know pandora. I know she’s a real person who doesn’t mischaracterize what people say and act like a little troll when someone says something she doesn’t like or agree with.
As far as anonone, I neither condemn nor condone the actions taken by one of my (other) anonymous readers. I simply thought it was pretty damn funny that a guy like anonone (who is, perhaps, one of the most vicious, reprehensible, and unaccountable anonymous commenters in the DE blogosphere) should get a taste of his own medicine.
That’s not quite fair, Mike. Online ID theft (unless it is a one-off spoof, and that should be rare) is in very poor form — no matter whether you agree with their politics or criticism.
Interesting. So agreement with political opinions and likeability are factors for you.
I sometimes disagree with you. Sometimes I don’t like what you write. Thus, under your own standards, if someone comes on DL using your name and posting material that is not only unrepresentative of your opinions but so defaming of your character, I am free to ignore your subsequent complaints.
Good to know.
LOL, Mike doesn’t like anonone, so attacks against him/her are fine.
Well, Cassandra, it lasted about 24 hours. I’m done with it.
By the way, I don’t consider an anonymous moniker an “identity.” I wouldn’t think anyone in their right (left?) mind would. I’ve offered to meet anonone multiple times for drinks and to keep his identity anonymous. Again, I’m the type of person who doesn’t really appreciate these Internet walls between us. Anonone has not been receptive to meeting me and I’m guessing he won’t now. I feel pretty confident and totally non-egotistical in saying “His loss.”
LOL, Mike doesn’t like anonone, so attacks against him/her are fine.
It would be just like nemski to mischaracterize and totally miss the point of what I was saying. Wait, are YOU anonone, nemski?
Personally, I’m of the evil camp that thinks if we can ID the jacker, THAT person should be outed as a jacker. Hmm…let me clarify, outed as an ID jacker AND a jackoff! I just don’t think doing things under the assumed ID of someone else is ever OK. Granted, anonymous commenting brings a different twist to it, but to go out of the way to be “anonone” when there is clearly another “anonone” does give off intent.
Oh, stop making me defend the real anonone, damnit!!! 👿
You know what? You are all cocksuckers!!!!
So agreement with political opinions and likeability are factors for you.
Which apparently didn’t apply to us when we were moderating then banning mike w.
I have a hard-on for nemski.
That’s funny, an anon’s identity being stolen.
Interesting. So agreement with political opinions and likeability are factors for you.
Another mischaracterization. Jesus, I need to start keeping a tally sheet. This is friggin’ hysterical.
You have GOT to be kidding, right? Jesus, I’m probably the most open blogger among this circle jerk known as the DE blogosphere. I’ve got right-wing nuts and left-wing nuts who write on my site. And you say *I* don’t like when people disagree with me politically?
Hey, that’s not me.
OK, now THIS is pretty funny!!!
Yes it is.
It’s spotlight on Mike Matthews!
It is like Sparticus.
Y’see, anonone has no sense of humor. I, on the other hand, do. Because I’ve never invested myself emotionally in this blogging bullshit after five years, I can sit back and laugh at the ridiculousness of it all.
Who’s on first, bitches?
I switched to Republican. I love DP.
OMG, this IS dangerous. We better keep it to this thread!!!
(hope the joke is taken well)
I don’t consider an anonymous moniker an “identity.”
The moniker isn’t an identity, but the presence behind it very often is. being anonymous or using a pseud is not defacto bad or less than those who use their names. People have good reasons to do this. But I guess you’ve put all potential anon commenters over at DWA “on notice”.
But I guess you’ve put all potential anon commenters over at DWA “on notice”.
Oh lord the hyperbole. The dramatics.
I think that what happened over at DWA was wrong. No excuses, just wrong. I can’t tell you how angry I was when I saw that some sophomoric ass posted a comment under my name.
That said, Mike corrected the situation as soon as I made him aware of it.
Will you correct the other bogus comments, Mike?
Every thread I post on is about me.
I think that what happened over at DWA was wrong. No excuses, just wrong.
More dramatics from the peanut gallery.
neither condemn nor condone the actions taken by one of my (other) anonymous readers.
Keep lying, Mike. Anybody can read your post where you said I deserved it. You could have stepped in at anytime to stop it. But you didn’t.
Just because you don’t consider an anonymous moniker an “identity” doesn’t mean that is isn’t one. 95% of the people here are anonymous to me, and I have never meant any of them. Your “he’s anonymous!!” excuse is totally bogus. I am actually a real live human being with an Internet name that happens to be different from my birth name. So what?
There was a time where I thought that we might be able to meet sometime and probably have a good time talking. I don’t feel that way now, and I am sorry for that. What you did and didn’t do yesterday crossed any line of trustworthiness.
Regardless, I hope what happened to me yesterday on your blog never happens to you.
Regardless, I hope what happened to me yesterday on your blog never happens to you.
It’s happening now . . . or is it.
It’s already happened to me here, anonone! And I’m loving it. Y’see, I’m able to “get over” things very quickly.
I think it got lost in the rapid (not)Mike-Mike comments, but it’s a valid point.
Personally, I’m of the evil camp that thinks if we can ID the jacker, THAT person should be outed as a jacker. Hmm…let me clarify, outed as an ID jacker AND a jackoff! I just don’t think doing things under the assumed ID of someone else is ever OK. Granted, anonymous commenting brings a different twist to it, but to go out of the way to be “anonone” when there is clearly another “anonone” does give off intent.
Oh, stop making me defend the real anonone, damnit!!! 👿
Though I have to admit it is easy to get over this other guy because he’s not threatening anyone. If that happens it is over the line.
when there is clearly another “anonone” does give off intent.
But do we know what the jacker’s intent was? I don’t. Why are you presuming to know Smitty?
Oh, the irony. MM, feeling non-egotistical doesn’t make it so.
Nothing he likes better than seeing his own name over and over again.
MM: If you have a serious problem with anonone, ban him from your site and stop acting like a child.
Agreed, Smitty. I’d love to know who posted as me, and a part of me believes I have a right to know.
Allowing this sort of behavior quickly spirals out of control. There was also another commenter at DWA, Paul, who had his identity taken.
Look, I’m not making anyone come over to my site.
I am actually a real live human being with an Internet name that happens to be different from my birth name. So what?
Funny, the way you treat others on these blogs led me to believe you’re a vindictive, hateful sonofabitch who throws tantrums when people don’t agree with your hardcore, PC, liberal ideology.
Again, your humanity seems to be overshadowed by your casual willingness to refer to people as “bigots” and “racists” when they put forth opinions differing from yours. ALL FROM THE CONVENIENCE OF YOUR SILLY, ANONYMOUS ONLINE HANDLE. Y’see, I don’t mind casual willingness to refer to people as “bigots” or “racists” when it’s coming from people who have the balls to put their names to their posts. And I don’t have a problem with anonymous commenters in general who are using the Intertubes to spread information and respectful opinions. I do have a problem with anonymous people who lob attacks via keyboard at those people who DO have the courage to sign their names.
I do have a problem with anonymous people who lob attacks via keyboard at those people who DO have the courage to sign their names.
Which is an excuse to let other’s steal anonone’s identity?
Give it to him Mike!!!
Which is an excuse to let other’s steal anonone’s identity?
What can I say, I’m filled with excuses.
MM should become a Scientologist. Similar views about “Fair Game”. Also, that whole head-up-the-ass thing.
Cassandra,
Yes, temporarily as part of a gag to drive the sanctimonious anonone crazy. You really need to stop acting like some old schoolmarm with me, Cassandra. It’s not working. Continue to defend anonone. I don’t really give a damn. The echo just keeps building in here.
Give it to him Mike!!!
I am, I am. Gosh, I’m so pleased with myself.
Xstryker,
Nah, the religion of liberalism is much more entertaining.
The echo just keeps building in here.
Damn, go away for lunch and see what happens.
Did you not read the post, Mike? Or are you too enthralled with your own keyboard that you missed the point about it?
Oooo, PC!
Haven’t heard that term in ages; even longer when used as something derogatory!
Whipper-snappers!
All right, let’s move on. MM is just an attention-seeking child, childishly lashing out at people who irk him. Nothing more is going to be accomplished by acknowledging his behavior, it just encourages him.
Point taken x.
I know why you feel that way, Mike, because all of your comments are nothing but sweetness and light filled with kindness and good words for everybody.
And I should be ashamed of myself for repeatedly calling one of your bloggers a “bigot” after he wrote that gays are evil and are going to cause the downfall of civilization.
After all, I have always been treated with such respect and gentleness by your bloggers.
Keep trying to make excuses for the inexcusable, Mike. This isn’t about me. Its about you.
You two are classic. Honestly, you deserve each other. Your myopic tendencies here are nothing short of sheer comedic brilliance.
“Attention-seeking child?” Code for: “He just won’t bend over and let us be right all the time.”
Again, I don’t say this to make myself look like some god, but I do feel I’m being wholly rational here whereas, some of the DL contributors are simply agreeing with the person (anonone) who happens to agree with them more often. Simple as that. It’s the classic echo chamber.
You’ve chosen anonone’s side because he comes on here and confirms and validates the opinions you all put up here on any given day. You defend him because, in your eyes, it’s really the right thing to do since he’s one of your echoes. On the other hand, you continue to scold me because I’m not interested in putting up with your shit, even though we likely agree ideologically on 99% of any range of issues.
Keep trying to make excuses for the inexcusable, Mike.
Nope, no excuses necessary. I’m just interested in keeping the dialogue open and not shutting it down by cowering in a corner, crying like a baby, and shouting “bigot!” and thus ending the conversation.
What’s the difference?
*gays are evil
*republicans are evil
you know, I have to be honest, if anonone got a better freaking handle than “anonone” this possibly could have ended differently.
The fact that we have so many anon’s is stupid.
Get a real fucking handle for christsakes
You don’t get it.
Stealing someone’s identity to slander them on a blog is wrong, no matter who it is. It isn’t about me, no matter how hard you try to make it about me.
It just happened to be me this time; it could be anybody else tomorrow.
It is about you and what you did and didn’t do.
h. – one’s a choice while the other is not?
Though I know of some where being a repub is not a choice, unless you want banishment!
h.
Being a republican is a choice. Being gay or straight is not. People aren’t denied equal rights under the law for being republican.
BTW, I don’t agree with the statement that “republicans are evil”.
Donhusseinsquishviti,
Actually it is pronounced “a-no-no-ne” where all the vowels are long. 🙂
I imagine anon1 on the floor in a fetal position, sucking thumb about now.
But do we know what the jacker’s intent was? I don’t. Why are you presuming to know Smitty?
Sorry for the delay, was away.
I have no idea, Mike. Didn’t even see the action on this. I just spoke based on what is on this thread. I’ve always found usurping someone’s handle, with the intent to be that person, as wrong. Of course, I also don’t care for people to use an0nymous handles to throw acidic (and sometimes libelous) charges at people, much like what Cahill in Smyrna had to endure several years ago. FTR, I am not saying anonone does that, just making a point.
Weird fantasy, h.
I love it a-no-no-ne. Anonone is a real person to me now. He has a voice that is recognizable as his own. Ignoring what someone has to say just because they have a pseudonym totally goes against what the blogosphere is about. The blogosphere opened up dialogue to everyone, and they didn’t have to be “pre-approved” by the traditional media. In fact, the name “Mike Matthews” meant nothing to me when I first saw it, any more than “anonone” did. I have no way of knowing if someone representing themselves as Mike Matthews is really someone named Mike Matthews, and nor do I care. Using a consistent pseudonym is giving someone a voice as well.
You really need to stop acting like some old schoolmarm with me, Cassandra.
Why? You don’t mind getting all holier-than-thou with us when we make management decisions you don’t much like. The difference is that we can at least explain the decision — you are here basically telling the world that no one can count on any integrity from your blog. Because you can never have any confidence that the people commenting are persistent personalities.
This is Delaware Liberal, where liberal moderators post articles or links that may be of interest to other liberals in or around Delaware.
Re: Smitty in #64. That MM wasn’t me. That was one of the “imposter” Mike Matthews’.
When have I gotten holier-than-thou about your management decisions? When? I’m simply saying there seems to be a bunch of like-minded individuals here who seem to enjoy their like-mindedness and who don’t like it when someone comes here and challenges them.
And don’t lecture me about integrity on my blog, OK? It was a silly prank. A silly prank that one REALLY holier-than-thou anonymous commenter (anonone) couldn’t handle, so he felt the need to come over here and get coddle by the like-minded crowd at DL.
By the way, I render all this nonsense moot the next time we all meet for drinks. Alcohol seems to have its way of easing the tensions among the us chattering class.
“you know, I have to be honest, if anonone got a better freaking handle than “anonone” this possibly could have ended differently.
The fact that we have so many anon’s is stupid.”
Donhusseinsquishviti – first of all, you are one to slam someone else’s handle.. yeah it is original but for about a month after i found this site (and after it made my life better 🙂 ) i though you just randomly typed a bunch of keys and made that you name 😉 …but I agree too many anon’s they could ALL be the same person
Slandering me by identity theft and letting people post bogus threats under my name is not just a “silly prank”, and it isn’t about me not being able to handle it.
Its about you committing one of the most sleazy and unethical acts that one blogger can do to another.
And, as your most recent post on DWA makes clear, you’d do it again
As I said, “Internet identity thieves are among the most deservedly reviled people in the Internet.”
That would be you.
Are you accusing Mike of being the one who stole your identity?
I wouldn’t hold DL accountable if someone posted under the reputable moniker “a. price” as long as it was removed quickly and anyone who was offended was informed it was not really me.. As long as that happened on DWA, I see no reason for you to be upset with anyone other than whoever did it. Yes it is wrong, we all agree but if you name has been cleared than it is over.
Re: Smitty in #64. That MM wasn’t me. That was one of the “imposter” Mike Matthews’.
WTF is going on here. That’s not MM, that’s the other MM.
When have I gotten holier-than-thou about your management decisions?
You obviously don’t read what you type.
a. price,
Mike and other DWA bloggers knew what was happening and deliberately refused to stop it or take down the bogus posts. You can read the threads over at DWA to follow the whole mess. I was told that their “unwritten policy” was to only remove spam.
Since the bogus posters were anonymous, I don’t know if he was one or not.
LOL
DL, or any other blog host, has no duty to protect your anonymous handle. It is your assumption of the risk to post where anyone can copy your handle and/or real name (if you use it).
a. price, we’ve had situations like that and have deleted posts unless of course they were posts mocking the Radical Right. 😉
That would change the situation anonoe and I’m sorry if i missunderestimated the situation.
well, that goes without saying. the Radical Right totally has it comming
Anonone,
I can tell you this unwaveringly. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. I was not one of the anonymous commenters. In fact, I pride myself on not using anonymous handles anywhere. Either I say it using “Mike Matthews” (or Mike M. as I used three or more years ago) or I don’t say it at all. Take that to the bank.
As far as “knowing” it was a prank, I honestly didn’t catch on until it was about three-quarters of the way done. By then, I was already working on getting those parties involved to quit it because I realized it could get old real quick.
I must say, though, you taking the bait was enjoyable.
anonone, please leave Mike alone. His over indulgence in posting just shows he knows he is wrong.
I believe you. I really didn’t think you were one of the actual bogus posters. They didn’t use much profanity. 🙂
All of you take this shit way too seriously! You’re all “anonymous” to most of your readers anyway. Get a real life!
I must say, though, you taking the bait was enjoyable.
And MM, if this is really you, spam elsewhere.
hmmm who is anyone really? does this site even exist? is it all just 2 of us with tons of names? what is the sound of one blogger blogging? namaste (and a side note… I happen to know that almost everyone in Greenville either takes, or teaches Yoga. how does Biden NOT know Namaste?
Some of you all need to just go jack off – seriously, it’ll help you relax and calm down. Let’s not take this online stuff too seriously.
Jesus H Christ.
All of this over a freakin nickname.
Anonone… if you want to protect your “anonymous identity” no matter how ridiculous that sounds, get your own blog. Your domain, your rules.
If you play in someone’s backyard, you have to play by their rules.
Enough said, quitcherbitchin.
A little late to the party, huh Brian? I guees it is nice to see someone working. 🙂
Hey Brian,
You might feel differently if somebody were making threatening posts on another blog using your Internet name and the blog owner wouldn’t take them down.
And besides, most small blogs don’t allow bogus posting when they know about it. Apparently at DWA, Mike decides on the rules on a case-by-case basis.
By the way, thanks for at least publicly owning up to your participation in the bogus posting. The other “friends” of Mike who started and participated in this mess weren’t doing him any favors.
For the record, does your blog allow this kind of bogus posting? What are your rules?
oh gord here we go again
heres a topic. Eric Holder called us a nation of cowards when it comes to race…. honestly, where the hell does he get off? I know there are still problems. but PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA !!!! that is proof that more than half of us aren’t cowards. he may have meant something else, but it sure was a stupid comment. whadayall think?
A1:
You don’t need to be coddled by the blog operator. Somebody was getting your goad. As Shields said, if you want to play by your rules, get your own blog. In the meantime, it’s not my responsibility or Mike’s to protect you from remarks which were really nothing of consequence. They were intended to cause confusion. The only thing that was compromised was your handle on one blog. Could we have played the nanny and stopped it? Yes. But it was funny, honestly. And I don’t think that we should have to. Echoing Mike, get over it. No, I wouldn’t be talking differently if it was me. If a comment which was, realistically speaking, harmless was that blatantly offensive to me, I would stop commenting. End of story.
And besides, most small blogs don’t allow bogus posting when they know about it. Apparently at DWA, Mike decides on the rules on a case-by-case basis. – AMEN!
Hey Mat. That’s the first comment by you in a long time. Welcome back.
I dunno. Cross that bridge when we come to it. I’d probably be happy to have more than one or two comments on a post or two.
I’d put a stop to it of course, if I could make heads nor tail of the situation.
I just tried to be funny. Nothing personal.
I do believe, however, that you are in the wrong. You can’t be both anonymous and have an identity. Maybe the “get your own blog” thing was out of line. You don’t have to say your name, just maybe pick a blog handle that does not have “anon” in it.
That being said, it’s their blog, their rules.
You can’t be both anonymous and have an identity.
Sure you can — it’s called a pseudonym.
Wow – a party..did I miss something? I GET TO BE 100!!!
You can’t be both anonymous and have an identity.
Brian, I work with people all over the world, often communicating with them only by computers. Some of them use nicknames because their names are not easy for Westerners to speak or spell. They are totally anonymous to me in that I know absolutely nothing about who they are, what they look like, or where they live.
Some work I have done for me is contracted through a third party, so I don’t even know their e-mail addresses. We communicate through blog-like forms.
Are these people anonymous to me? Sure. Do they have identities and personalities? Absolutely.
I think that in many ways we’re still stuck in the paradigm that only your single identity in only the physical world counts, whereas with the advent of virtual reality spaces and avatars, people are no longer locked into a single identity.
The Delaware blogopshere a virtual community.
So, while people here don’t know my birth name or details about my personal life, I most certainly have an identity here just as all of the other anonymous-to-me names who post here regularly do. In fact, I personally know as much about you as you do about me. I don’t know if your name really is “Brian Shields” in real life (I assume that it is), but it doesn’t matter to me because in this community a person become known through the messages of their communications.
Some people can’t accept the fact that in this day and age it is perfectly acceptable to have different identities in different virtual communities that are different than and separate from one’s physical identity.
I gotta go to bed…
Good points cassandra and A1.
Consider me persuaded otherwise. But I would say that if such a hissy fit and attention wasn’t made to yourself, this would never have blown up. It could probably have been solved by an email.
So, what’s the deal then? A poll to determine A1’s new pseudonym for the blogosphere?
Here is my take. A1 is my main man. I love his (her?) piss and vinegar. We need more of that spirit on our side.
But Mike is human and when you poke a human in the eye with a shit covered stick everyday for 6 months you shouldn’t by surprised when that person lashes out in some way.
And to be honest, if not correcting a situation was the way Mike picked to lash out – thats a pretty restrained response.
Did I mention A1 is da bomb?
Mat,
1) Just because you and your friends think something is funny doesn’t mean that it is funny to everybody or that it isn’t causing harm to a person or group of people (including yourself).
2) Sometimes “silly pranks” have consequences unforeseen by the perpetrators and have very bad outcomes.
In this instance, the person or persons who started the bogus posting and you, who was in a position to stop it but encouraged it instead, put your friend Mike in a bad situation. I told you in several posts that you were destroying trust in DWA and you were on a slippery slope, but you all essentially just laughed.
In spite of your personal views, the vast majority of people in online communities understand that stealing someone’s online identity to smear them is a line that shouldn’t be crossed, no excuses. It is dishonest, unethical, and destroys trust. By crossing that line and then encouraging it to continue, it ended up in the situation we are today. Had you and the other identity thieves exercised better judgment before this started, then Mike would not have had to make the decisions that he did.
I can say pretty confidently that Mike is a person who is faithful and loyal to his friends. Most of his complaints about me are not so much about our arguments, but that he hates the way I go after the other bloggers on DWA, who are his friends, like calling Leo a bigot for saying gays are evil.
So I think that it is interesting to see how the person or persons who did the bogus posting have hung Mike out to dry. None of them, except Brian (who did right away and I respect for doing so), have stepped up to either defend Mike or apologize to him for posting bogus on his blog. Class acts, each one of them.
You might think about the angst and pain that this totally avoidable situation has caused your friend Mike and the damage it has done to DWA’s trustworthiness and credibility. Then you can decide for yourself if it was worth the laughs.
Jason,
I can’t be da bomb ’cause you IS da bomb!
Thanks, man.
‘ not my responsibility or Mike’s to protect you from remarks which were really nothing of consequence. ‘
weanie asshat?
A1 you should know, if you don’t already, that Mat is the son of Dominique who is the sister of Leo. He couldn’t wait to fuck you up for hating on them, dude.
I have no tolerance for people who take on children, anon. Back off.
Hair trigger, Pandora. That was useful and relevant information that didn’t come near crossing the line in my opinion. If it goes beyond that I’d agree with smacking it down.
Holy crap! Is there an anon-union event going on here? They’re all coming out in protest! What’s next? A big inflatable rat suddenly appearing over top of the DWA site?
I kid, I kid. 😛
If you go back to the early days of this blog and others there were a lot of anon comments. It is part of the heritage. If you take away the anons, you are left with an echo chamber of the same ten or twelve people.
Using your real name for political commentary is OK if you make your living doing political commentary. But if you do something else for a living it is risky.