| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 192.1 | YES | CSSE32::PHILPOTT | CSSE/Lang. & Tools, ZK02-1/N71 | Thu Oct 02 1986 16:06 | 13 |
| Variations of the idea have been discussed as wish-list items for
Notes, and clearly won't happen until Notes V2 or whatever (even
if then). However I personally think that in the sort of situations
you suggest it might be useful to have such a facility.
The 'ZKO_SUGGESTION_BOX' conference already uses an anonymous entry
system (less complex than that suggested by Martin), and I am sure
that it could be useful, provided it could be free of abuse (anonymity
could not be a cover for insults and slanderous language...)
so -- 1 vote for 'YES'
/. Ian .\
|
| 192.2 | requires a very careful moderator | VIKING::FLEISCHER | Bob Fleischer | Thu Oct 02 1986 17:17 | 11 |
| re Note 192.1 by CSSE32::PHILPOTT:
> I am sure
> that it could be useful, provided it could be free of abuse (anonymity
> could not be a cover for insults and slanderous language...)
Yes! But certainly, as you point out, such a file still needs a moderator. In
fact, a moderator may even need to be more selective in what stays, since
anonymous accusations are especially nasty.
Bob
|
| 192.3 | Can be useful | SCFAC::PEIRCE | Michael Peirce, Santa Clara FAC | Thu Oct 02 1986 20:39 | 8 |
| This kind of feature could be very nice for certain situations.
We had an ablility to change our names to provide anonymity or
pseudonyms on a conferences system back at school (*FORUM at RPI).
This was abused a couple of times, but that was in a college
environment. I would hope people at DEC could handle
the restraint it requires.
-- michael
|
| 192.4 | | AKOV68::BOYAJIAN | Forever On Patrol | Fri Oct 03 1986 06:12 | 6 |
| It should perhaps be noted (if you'll excuse the expression) that
just such a scheme (moderators will post anonymous notes for others)
has been instituted in HUMAN_RELATIONS. I haven't seen any such
notes yet, but the system has been established.
--- jerry
|
| 192.5 | Stand behind what you say | DAMSEL::MOHN | blank space intentionally filled | Fri Oct 03 1986 13:33 | 10 |
| While I do understand the apparent need in some cases for anonymous
authorship, at the same time I have a bit of a problem: If one
feels a strong need to retain anonymity, is NOTES the right place
for the discussion? A recent reply to another note in this conference
suggested the model of a few friends talking in a conference room
with the conversation being broadcast to the whole world. This
knowledge among the participants ought to provide all of the
"moderation" that could possibly be required. Anonymity could very
well release inhibitions to unacceptable levels. I'm against it
on principle.
|
| 192.6 | no: use private notes | REGENT::MERRILL | Glyph it up! | Fri Oct 03 1986 22:18 | 10 |
| 192.7 | There ARE times ... | CLAM::VICKERS | Try and imagine ... | Sat Oct 04 1986 03:23 | 18 |
| This is a rough call. As pointed out in .6 having anonymous notes
can lead to some real trash getting into the conference. However,
there are times when it is really important.
The best example is the AA conference which is restricted to members
only but ALSO allows anonymous entries due to the prejustice that
can fall to people using the conference. While I am not an active
participant in the AA conference, I understand that the ability
to have anonymous entries was vital to its survival. Further, the
anonymous facility does not seem to causing the moderators too much
more effort. Moderating a members only conference, alone, is already
enough trouble on the E-net.
Having anonymous entries into a general conference as potentially
hot as this one would seem to be asking for a great deal of pain
for the moderators and, subsequently, the conference itself.
Don
|
| 192.8 | yes | ACE::BREWER | John Brewer Component Engr. @ABO | Sat Nov 15 1986 00:00 | 4 |
|
I vote yes... lets not damn it prematurely.
-John
|
| 192.9 | yes indeed | VIKING::TARBET | Margaret Mairhi | Mon Nov 17 1986 14:36 | 15 |
| For years, the notefiles on Plato had an anon option, and I "directed"
(moderated) several in which having the option was the only way people
could feel safe enough to participate. Although it was a very mixed
environemnt...universities, industry, the military, and high schools
were all represented in these files...the option was generally not
abused and "mistakes" were usually just that: somebody being too new
to understand community standards.
Even after CDC removed the option, fearing just the sort of abuse we're
discussing even though there was no evidence of it, a substitute driver
was quickly written so that anon participation could continue.
The quality of the individual community is what counts.
=maggie
|