Junior Ganymede
We endeavor to give satisfaction

A rejoinder to “We attack, you defend.”

July 24th, 2014 by Bookslinger

I think this is a proper rejoinder to anyone who attacks you or accuses you of hating them, or tries to shame you for commenting, when you publicly disagree with something that they have publicly stated/written/published.

From Meg Stout: (Her comment of July 23, 2014, 5:25 am, if the link does not take you directly there.)

” … to openly attack and demean the organization from which one has parted makes the matter public record.

And when something is a matter of public record, it appears within my [F]irst [A]mendment rights to comment on the public record. As it is within your rights to comment on my comment. However it is not within your rights to force the owners of [a blog or forum] to give you bandwidth on their website. “

Comments (14)
Filed under: Brilliantly Lit,Deseret Review | Tags:
July 24th, 2014 19:47:02
14 comments

h_nu
July 25, 2014

Cowards censor comments.
Mature adults refute them.


Vader
July 25, 2014

h_nu, that rule of thumb, like most rules of thumb, has important qualifiers.


Bruce Charlton
July 25, 2014

Cowardly commenters hide behind anonymity.
Mature adults post under their own names.

Sorry about that snide quip “h_nu” (and the non Adam-G posters here) – pseudonymity may perhaps sometimes be essential; although I seem to recall one of the General Authorities advising against it. But, either way, anonymity pretty much precludes calling somebody else a coward.


G.
July 25, 2014

I was sorely tempted to delete h_nu’s comment for lulz, but the better angels of my nature intervened.


Vader
July 25, 2014

I don’t comment under my actual name because my employer has asked me to keep a small Internet footprint.

That may change. If only because I retire or change jobs.


Vader
July 25, 2014

His Majesty: “I can only admire the tenacity and dedication of someone who makes the effort to look up every blog, however obscure, that links to a comment thread that has been moderated, and post snarks there about the moderation, however reasonable. I can find a use for such hands.”


Bookslinger
July 25, 2014

V, perhaps HM misconstrued which side h_nu was snarking upon.


Agellius
July 25, 2014

I understand the argument that anonymity leads people to act worse than they would in real life. But I think that assumes the case of people who don’t care about their online reputation.

I, for one, definitely care about my online reputation, since I am presenting myself to the “online world” as a devout Catholic and have no wish to scandalize people. I’m sure Vader feels the same way.

I think this can serve to moderate people’s online behavior every bit as much as if they used their real names. It just depends on the person and what his motives are.


John Mansfield
July 25, 2014

I can see why many people would prefer to be untraceable, but the increase of that need makes the blogging endevour feel increasingly sordid. First and last name identification is now a dwindling minority.


Vader
July 25, 2014

Indeed. I am seriously considering defying my employer to become an more unsordid blogger.

Keeping my Internet footprint small worded as a suggestion, not as a necessary condition of employment.


Zen
July 25, 2014

While I understand the need and importance of anonymity, I think it is going to be less and less a feasible option. Technologically, this is the Information Age, and information is only going to get easier to find. But also, I am always interested when the scriptures talk about things being “shouted from the housetops” or hidden things be revealed unto “babes and sucklings”.

We need more openness and not less. Sunlight really is the best disinfectant.


G.
July 26, 2014

All true, but at the present my taste for martyrdom is less than my taste for continued employment.


MC
July 26, 2014

I work for The System, so using my full name is essentially a choice to never stray too far from the approved line. In maintaining quasi-anonymity, I like to think of myself as a double agent for the Resistance. Doesn’t seem so cowardly to remain anonymous that way.


Bruce Charlton
July 26, 2014

I hope I haven’t offended any of the non-Adam bloggers who are using pseudonyms. Obviously the fact that I am a devoted reader and commenter here means I respect you all (or nearly all…!). I realize pseudonymity is necessary or at least prudent for many people.

I myself had already had a couple of episodes of international media Watson-ing (one in 2008 over class and IQ in relation to university selection after which I was slandered – although not by name – by a government minister at the national trades union congress; and then the sacking from editing Medical Hypotheses which was triggered by a PC pressure group dedicated to censoring the scientific literature on the subject of AIDS) before I even began blogging, so there was never any point in my retreating behind a pseudonym – it was too late.

However, using a pseudonym and then accusing others of cowardice (which happens A LOT in blog comments) strikes me as a ‘chickenhawk’ kind of thing to do.

Leave a Reply