My dog has a Facebook account. And an email account. All verified! Had to lie about the dog’s birth date. No internet site registration form accepts being 7 years old = adulthood although that’s certainly true of dogs.
Convert from dog years to human years by multiplying by 7.
Many of my Facebook friends are dogs.
Or was it an Oscar??
My real name is Potiphar, and I’m a dromedary. But owing to speciesism and identity theft, I not only have to post here under a pseudonym, but write books too. It’s just like it used to be for Charlotte Bronte (who had to post under a male pen-name, even though she was in fact a boa-constrictor named Gladys.)
The obvious first question to me is how do you separate people who use anonymity to protect themselves (i.e. this is a legitimate concern of various Christians). There are many examples of Christians aiming to destroy those that appear to question or challenge part of what they believe. The most recent of hundreds of such people that I became aware of was William Dembski, summarized by this blogger:
It is sad and rather disgusting, but a fact that many do need/want to engage on forums like these but fear repercussions should they be found out. Perhaps this has been discussed above but separating such folks from those that aim to harm (what examples were you thinking of @Patrick) would be a concern of mine.
Let me join the fun. My real name is Petunia, and I was last seen falling toward the planet earth next to a rather giddy sperm whale. Oh no, not again.
Seriously. The reason for anonymity and disclosure pivot around the same issue. Those who wish to remain secret want to be safe from disclosure. But the reasons for this wish can be justifiable or malicious. Or both. To be protected from disclosure at work or church is definitely a legitimate reason. To want to hide so you can malign other people behind a protective screen is wrong. Likewise, someone who wants to protect his identity while harassing and insulting others with impunity is not justified.
You’d think ID proponents would like anonymity. It gives them a great excuse to dodge serious and difficult questions about their ID claims by falsely asserting anonymous pro-science posters are not worthy of answers.
Which is another reason we should respect those who are here with their real names.
Respect is earned by the words people write. It doesn’t matter one bit what name they choose to write it under.
I think he was too stiff fo that.
Eventually, Horton will hear a “who?” for what the question truly is. : )
What I don’t understand is why your paranoia runs so deep and why you’re so irrational on this subject. Makes one wonder how rational you are on other subjects.
You really should get some professional help for your creepy obsession about other people’s personal information. Do you stalk other people in real life?
So anyway, what’s all this dissing of Al Gore? He did indeed do a lot to make the internet a public thing. He did indeed do a lot to bring the current global warming crisis to public attention. He got some recognition for that, justifiably so. He lost an election, sort of. Why make fun of him for all that?
Incidentally, I don’t think you’re earning much respect here for the words you write.
I know you’re earning none for your creepy stalking. Go pick another target for your unhealthy obsession.
That wouldn’t be very Christian of them to do that. All the more reason to “come out” against injustice, intolerance and other people who are just trying to push their beliefs on others. Your don’t have to believe what your parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles believe or what your employers beliefs. In this country, conditions of employment based on belief is not enforceable, in fact employees can sue employers who harass employees for their beliefs or non-beliefs.
5 posts were split to a new topic: Mung’s Status on Anonymity
In an ideal world sure, but there are fundamentalist Christians loose in our country and things like the Clergy Project exist because there is no safe place for many.