Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Flashback: “Internet privacy: rights vs. privileges (an open forum),” Feb 2007

In light of the late unpleasantness here — and as a reminder of where I stand on certain issues and why I believe the way I do — I’m going to reprint this earlier post that tackles the ethics of revealing the names of anonymous attackers.

You are free to discuss this, but I ask that you please keep it civil. In the year and a half since I wrote this, my position hasn’t much changed. In fact, if anything, my patience with such attacks has worn even more thin — making my fuse that much shorter.

From Feb 25, 2007:

What my latest dustup with has showcased, I believe, are some of the growing pains of the new media, which, given its virtual nature, makes it easy for anyone wishing to do so to obscure his or her personal identity online.

This ability to create a controlling persona— to write from the position of near-absolute freedom that comes with shedding your meatspace identity—is both a blessing and a curse, and so, from an ethical perspective, should necessarily, as I’ll argue here, resist the kind of absolutist approach to privacy protections many have advocated (myself, at one time, among them). 

Dr Haggerty and his fellow ideologues DEMAND the freedom to write what they wish; and on this point, I agree with them both philosophically and in practice, provided they follow applicable laws.  Free speech is an essential component of liberty, as well as one of the driving forces behind whatever successes to which a representative form of government can lay claim.

But what Haggerty and his fellow ideologues also demand—and to be clear, ideologues exist on all sides of the political divide— is the right to launch smear campaigns aimed at people who use their real identities, and to do so without fear that these attacks will come back to “anyone” other than their online personasландшафт.  Which, too, is a position I can live with—up to a point. 

It is only when these personal attacks approach libel, or are intended to incite violence—or when they are being deployed as a cynical and dishonest way to discredit the person in question (a McCarthyesque tactic if ever there was one)—that the ethics of commanding anonymity should, in my opinion, be open to re-examination.

138 Replies to “Flashback: “Internet privacy: rights vs. privileges (an open forum),” Feb 2007”

  1. happyfeet says:

    I never knew MayBee’s real name but I miss her something awful, so it goes both ways. She is genteel, and I hardly ever get to use that word ever. So, I like anonymous peoples very much sometimes I think. I don’t like the ones that are sort of like ferrets though.

  2. Jeff G. says:

    Maybee never used her screen name as a shield from behind which she tried to destroy someone’s reputation. So that doesn’t obtain.

  3. happyfeet says:

    I was just feeling nostalgic is all. Wistful, even. I might could even sigh feelingly any second now.

  4. happyfeet says:

    Mostly cause someone not me is gonna say it… hey didn’t thor a lot try to savage Karl’s reputation from behind a cloak of anonymity? It seems sort of inherent to this argument that if you stake out a position like this then you err on the side of protecting someone’s reputation when you apply these sorts of principles I think.

    That’s what I think someone is bound to say. If I were to guess.

  5. mcgruder says:

    forgive me, as I have been on deadline permanently it seems, but why does this issue come to the fore presently?

    in related news, feel better. that’s a nasty bit on your hand.

    Mcgruder

  6. Slartibartfast says:

    I think Jeff removed the threads wherein the recent offenses, and subsequent harsh exchanges, were committed.

    Which is probably good, and some sort of signal that he has resolved things to the agreement, if not the happiness, of most parties concerned.

    None of my business, really.

  7. Jeff G. says:

    Did I ever stop Karl from getting thor’s real name? Did Karl ever ask for thor’s real name?

    Thing is, I know thor’s real name. And as I said elsewhere, had thor been going onto other sites making claims about Karl’s racism, that would have changed the calculus.

    Also, thor’s commentary about Karl is readily refutable given that it’s attached to the post themselves. Also also, I don’t think comments are really very Google happy.

    Is how I might answer. If someone were bound to say that.

    There, there.

  8. happyfeet says:

    Ok, ok. So there are like tons of provisos.

  9. happyfeet says:

    Glad we got that dispensed with right up top here.

  10. Jeff G. says:

    Right, tons. Or, like, two.

  11. Pablo says:

    Definitely worth revisiting. The link in the old post, however, does not work, being an old format or something.

  12. cranky-d says:

    I consider my identity to be a brand, and I need to protect that brand as if it were my own name, since it’s me representation on the web. I am pseudo-anonymous because in my line of work, and regarding the kinds of people I work for, people have been fired for holding some of the opinions I have written about. However, I don’t say anything I wouldn’t say in person (given a reasonable assurance that it won’t affect my ability to work). To me, that’s the only way one should use anonymity. Using anonymity to attack someone so it can be done without fear of reprisal is an abuse.

  13. hoss says:

    Yer all racists.

    Signed,
    Anonymous

  14. happyfeet says:

    You know who uses his real name all the time is that Brendan Loy. He would probably have something insightful to say. If we were talking about like precipitations. Or pressure troughs maybe.

  15. urthshu says:

    Or even pistachio muffins, of which I’m eating one.

  16. mcgruder says:

    ok. I still have no reason why this occurred, at least specifically, but presumably some anonymous person said preposterous things about someone like Jeff, who uses his real name.

    As a reporter, I am very very accustomed to someone like “[insert-my-real-name-here]isacorruptscum@hotmail.com” emailing with pointed comments about my work, ethics and cranial capacity. It hurts and angers more than you think, but you roll onward.

    But guys like Jeff, who have to teach in a highly politicized environment, I guess it could really hurt. God knows there’s enough ill will out there.

  17. geoffb says:

    I think email is a different thing as unless it is posted for all to see it is just between two people. Slander posted to a blog becomes a permanent thing attached to a real world name. Googled forever. As if the slanderous emails got put into Lexix/Nexis with your name attached.

    I remember in high school “it will go on your permanent record” was a joke. Now it’s not one. I know from personal experience.

  18. Enrak says:

    Oh ye gods! Another geoffb/jeffb/jeffb???

  19. geoffb says:

    I’m geoffb I’ve used that here and everywhere since getting on the internet in the mid 90’s. Jeff B is a different person and the fake Jeff B was not either of us.

    My life would have been easier growing up as a “Jeff” instead of a “Geoff”. You would not believe the weird things my name was pronounced as over school PA systems.

  20. dicentra says:

    I maintain my anonymity because I am a single woman, living alone, in an ungated community with no attack dogs and no guns. I can’t afford to worry that someone might find out where I live or work and decide to “teach me a lesson.” I’ve seen how ugly things can get on the intartubes, and the crazies are more likely than the general population to be on it.

    However, Jeff is correct that if I were causing harm to others under my plantonym, then I would be crossing the line from caution to cowardice. Maybe a new standard of netiquette can evolve wherein pseudonyms have nearly no credibility when it comes to defamation and other unprovable assertions.

  21. dicentra says:

    Oh, and the first link in the blockquote goes here:

    https://proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/22485/

    Which just brings you back to this page. Very vertiginous.

  22. XBradTC says:

    I’m semianonymous. There are people out there who know my real name. It isn’t some secret. And since I rarely make ad hominem attacks (rarely, not never), I’m not that worried about it. And if someone wants to engage in a vigorous debate, no problem. You are more than welocme to disagree with me, even call me a buffoon. But if some anonymous poster were to defame or libel me, I would have no reason not to expose them. Sunshine is a fine disinfectant.

  23. Enrak says:

    Sorry Geoff B. Supposed to be a joke. Turns out “not funny” ruins the joke.

  24. Slartibartfast says:

    Jeff knows my name. A few others do. Dan, for one. Hell, maybe absolutely everyone on the Internet knows my mailing address and what size athletic supporter I wear. Which, neither here nor there, my daughters refer to as a “cupholder”.

    Anyway, I don’t care all that much, because I only seek to not have my name all over the internet, every time I comment on a weblog. Anyone else wants to know my name, just ask, but I simply don’t want people putting doing a she-who-shall-not-be-named on my family.

    I also try to be courteous to people, for similar reasons, until they turn out to be committed to assholism. I probably fail as regards the courtesy thing all too often. I know I contributed to the escalation of the last few days, for which I offer my apologies and regrets to Jeff. His blog; it doesn’t have to be WWF all of the time.

  25. McGehee says:

    It boils down to that internet privacy/anonymity is a gentlemanperson’s agreement, and those who do not conduct themselves accordingly cannot expect to be accorded the privilege forever.

    Motivate someone sufficiently, and any of us can be found.

    So each of us adopts such defenses as we deem best for our purposes; since I use my real surname, and since my full name is easily found on my site, and since there are multiple avenues someone could use to find my physical address on the internet, I keep several thousand rounds of ammunition stashed in various places around my house, three days a week. Only I know which three days.

  26. Slartibartfast says:

    I think maybe that link should have been to here, instead.

  27. cranky-d says:

    Moving that ammunition on the off-days is also one way to keep in shape.

  28. McGehee says:

    Cuts into my sitting-around-watching-TV time, too.

  29. kelly says:

    I’ll bet that’s hell on the housekeeping, McG.

  30. Mark A. Flacy says:

    I keep several thousand rounds of ammunition stashed in various places around my house

    Maybe you should get a matching firearm. :-)

  31. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    My name really is obstreperous infidel. My parents are kind of strange. It almost was cockweevil. That could have been embarrassing here lately.

  32. Took me four years to get my cookies to work when I want them and not when I don’t. No one’s taking that away from me.

    So, can we talk about Louisville v Kentucky? What the hell happened?

  33. John Lynch says:

    I post under my real name, and like dicentra above, do what I can to protect my name by saying online what I would happily say in person.

    Then along came another John Lynch, whose views I mostly agreed with, although sometimes not, but who was not always polite. The person read and commented on some of the same sites! (althouse, here)

    What to do?

    Just when I thought I had that figured out: along comes another. (although with a middle initial)

    Real name usage is an incomplete and insufficient protection against those who attack; the attacks are usually a first cut of ad hominem, and anonymity the first excuse.

  34. Rusty says:

    #26

    That’s strange. I do the same thing, only with large boxes of donuts.

  35. geoffb says:

    Enrak,

    I took it as a joke, I just didn’t want to have that whole thing about who is who start up.

    Late responding as I had to go to the dentist to fix a broken tooth. Nicely numb now and hungry.

  36. Michael says:

    My real name is Adolph, so you can see why I came up with a handle.

  37. Mikey NTH says:

    See Robert Louis Stevenson’s Strange Case of Dr.Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

    The internet is the secret formula, so to speak.

  38. I’ve got everyone fooled.My “handle” is “Carin” but you guys have it all wrong. I bet you thought it was pronounced like Karen.

    HA ha HA. It’s not! But, I’m coming out of the closet now- giving up my secret identity. It’s pronounced Car – In.

    I suppose I should prolly buy a gun now.

  39. happyfeet says:

    This conversation isn’t really grounded in anything. Some people are just mean is all. Some people who are not Brendan Loy anyway. I think this post is not really for our edification here so much as for if those sort of like ferret people wander over. That’s what I’m guessing anyway. Also I haven’t seen JD all day at least. Maybe he’s on a fun-filled vacation or something. New Girl went somewhere where you ride jet skis this weekend and they gave their leftover pizza and beer to some transients. She used the word transients. I never call them transients, but I think that will be my new word. You can’t sit outside at that Starbucks cause of all the transients, I will say. Ever since they opened the subway it’s been like that.

  40. Dan Collins says:

    Leftover beer? WTF?

  41. I think transients can be applied to a larger audience. Young kids slumming it for the summer can be transients. A bum, on the other hand, has more specific criteria. Urine smell, for instance, should be strong.

  42. Car-in says:

    Dan, if they had leftover beer, they obviously weren’t trying hard enough.

  43. Sdferr says:

    Murderous hurricane coming! Run away transients! Run soonest!

  44. John Cheshire says:

    Jeff-

    Glad you re-posted this; it’s a good read and covers all the bases quite nicely. It also reminds me to go back and read some of your older stuff…I don’t know why I should need the reminder though.

    Happy feet-

    Let me just state for the record that I loved reading Karl’s posts. He is very good at what he does. However, I lost a bit of respect for him when he left. Not because he left but why and how he left.

    Thor is an annoyance because he makes feeble arguments really well. In other words he is skilled at playing rhetorical twister. However, thor never succeeded in painting Karl as a racist but in showing his own ass. Jeff summed it up nicely when he stated that thor’s behavior was both performative and instructive.

    The only thing Karl did by leaving as he did, was lend a small smidge of undeserved credibility to thor and his comments. This is to say that it would have been better for Karl to remain posting and, with the help of commenter’s here, provide thor with a rhetorical smack down every time he starts dropping turds in the comment thread.

    Instead, by trying to silence him, he came off looking a bit weak IMHO.

    Pity that.

  45. Car-in says:

    I refuse to “judge” Karl like that John- nuances and details don’t really come across well over the internets. I suppose he just got sick of dealing with it. I can understand that.

    I wish he hadn’t left, but he did, and I don’t see the point of trying to crucify him.

  46. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    I’m not sure John is trying to crucify him, though. I think he wishes karl would have ignored the heckling loon. I do too, and I wasn’t even that “into” Karl’s posts. But that was for content reasons, as I, unlike many others, didn’t really get into the political analysis aspects of karl’s very well put together posts. But it is kind of funny. I didn’t think I’d miss his posts, but I do a little. I wish he’d come back into the Pub and do that vodoo that he do so well. He is very good at that kind of post.

  47. Zelda says:

    I started blogging under a pseudonym mostly because I didn’t want anyone in my family to find out I wrote naughty stuff on the internet, but also because I wrote (and still write) trite, self-absorbed drivel that seems unworthy of attaching my name to. Because really it was all just for fun. Anything I would say on the internet I would say (and probably have said) in person, but I wouldn’t be terribly proud of most if it one way or another.

    Then I started writing about politics here and there, and was suddenly very aware of how much my anonymity protected me. I remember (fondly) the first threatening email I ever got detailing the ass rape complete with bleeding fissures that I apparently deserved for pointing out on a left-wing blog some hypocrisy in the UN. It referenced my daughters, my husband, my house, and the city I said I lived. They had combed through my blog for all these details and used them specifically to try to intimidate me. And I’ve had more since then.

    I wish I’d been brave and exposed this person and his hideous tactics, but I simply don’t have the stomach to go through what Jeff went through on any level. And unfortunately, it seems inevitable if one is adept at debate, or at least happened at one time to make a point that couldn’t be easily refuted. Nothing brings out the self-loathing insane like being trounced in an argument, particularly by someone like Jeff who is razor sharp and merciless. And I wasn’t even witty. Just correct.

    Anyway (and I know I’ve gone on way too long) I must have the protection of anonymity, otherwise I wouldn’t blog. It’s too dangerous. And I worry about retaliation by those who have been exposed in their libelous hatred. However, while I’m not the bravest of bloggers, I am brave enough to fully support anyone with the real courage to shine the light on these crazy assholes. So shine on, Jeff.

  48. Mikey NTH says:

    Jeff has already stated how he saw his role here regarding guest posters and commenters.

    Outside of that, thor is a lying bully who picked Karl as his target. The past month should be enough evidence to thor’s character – actually his lack of a redeeming character. thor is worshipping a politician, and will attack anyone who disparages that politician.

    I do not know the content of the conversations between Jeff and thor; but I guess thor is trying to keep within the letter of the law by not accusing, directly, any commenter as a racist if that commenter says something bad about Sen. Obama. That may explain thor’s recent comments which expresses violence towards other commenters – both physical and sexual – without actually saying that commenter is a racist.

    thor is skilled at using the letter of the law, and going right up to the edge of the expressed letter, without crossing over.

    I would note, however, that there is something called equity, which ‘delights in doing justice’. I would ask Jeff, when he has time, to look at the relation of law and equity. It is a fascinating area of law because it is so restricfted, but when it can cut loose, so powerful.

    As an example, I will quote Portia’s speech:

    “The quality of mercy is not strain’d,
    It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
    Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest;
    It blesseth him that gives and him that takes:
    ‘Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes
    The throned monarch better than his crown;
    His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,
    The attribute to awe and majesty,
    Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;
    But mercy is above this sceptred sway;
    It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,
    It is an attribute to God himself;
    And earthly power doth then show likest God’s
    When mercy seasons justice. Therefore, Jew,
    Though justice be thy plea, consider this,
    That, in the course of justice, none of us
    Should see salvation: we do pray for mercy;
    And that same prayer doth teach us all to render
    The deeds of mercy.”

  49. happyfeet says:

    oh. I already said I think that I’ve already said all I’m gonna say cause I can’t think of anything I can say that will make everything right. Just that Karl was really my guy for this election thing, that’s for sure, cause he had the content and he had the right tone and he really was a gift I thought and I am sad he’s not blogging anymore cause it was valuable and nothing has even come close to replacing that.

    I didn’t get the leftover beer thing either really. I could ask later but I think we’re sort of on to the next thing. She’s going to watch Hillary’s speech tonight for me.

  50. serr8d says:

    I’ve used this handle since C-64 days. It’s been around the early pre-web at 300 baud, when the flashy cursor crap was king. It’s fairly unique, but, yes, dated. People who need to know, know who I am. Hell, Dan’s on my full-name e-mail crap list. Jeff cashed one of my checks, so he knows my bank account number, my wife’s name and our telephone number. Trust, and all of that.

    I would feel fine sharing my personal information with the regular commenters here, but there are more bad people out there than any of us realize. Just because we feel safe in, say, this comment thread, doesn’t mean we really are. There’s roving ‘bots and live tools who regularly scour threads for information. A clever handle is not about hiding from confrontation with a commenter or another blogger; it’s more protection against real threats, including identity theft. And the occasional crazy.

    I know Timb scours every thread. He’s left taunts on my blog, and at Dan’s, gloating and bragging about current events here.

    I had a kerfuffle at a newspaper forum before I started blogging that involved actual death threats, from a fairly well-connected State of Tennessee employee. I employed lawyers; he wound up (because he posted from a State computer on my time) suspended without pay for 2 weeks, and ‘promoted’ to a non-PC terminal sort of position. Haven’t been troubled by him since. But I think his dad retired from the state legislature last year, so he’s on his best behavior. But, his hate was malignant, so…Serr it is.

    Couldn’t understand it, either. I’m such a nice guy!

  51. Mikey NTH says:

    As an addendum: God knows I do not wish to be treated justly; for there are many things I have done and said that I have forgotten, that if impartial justice was enacted based on my own actions and words I would be doomed by my own standards. Mercy is the only plea I have; yet after receiving mercy if I go and commit the same acts, say the same words, I should not expect any further mercy from that tribunal. Merely justice deserved.

    I am not perfect or sinless; I just know that I am not perfect or sinless.

  52. Mikey NTH says:

    I use Mikey NTH because when I commented there were a lot of Mikes out there, as well as Mikeys. At coldfury I used Mikey NTH (Not The Host) to differentiate myself from Mike Hendrix. It has stuck with me as a good signal, a unique moniker.

  53. Carin says:

    I always wondered what NTH stood for.

  54. Jeff B. says:

    Just when I thought it was safe to return to using my original name here on PW, along comes “geoffb.” Damn you!

    (Just kidding, buddy. I’m glad your parents decided not to name you “Jeff,” however.)

  55. The Lost Dog says:

    I learned the common sense of anonyminity at alt.Bush, in the newsgroups.

    I am not ashamed of how I think, nor am I ashamed to speak it out loud. But when you wake up in the morning with your Inbox full of batshit nuts hate mail, you begin to think about anonynimity.

    I don’t know how Jeff can deal with it, and even though I know it’s best to ignore it, getting that crap from complete strangers is like a poke in the eye. And very hard to bite your tongue after being attacked by leftist morons who think that America is about threatening death to you and your family for the way that you think.

    In fact, sometimes when I wind up teeing off, it is as often as not on people who fit this definition in my way of thinking. I don’t blame Jeff one bit for how he responds to some people. Even if they are not quite the threat they seem (and many are a real threat), Jeff has been through honest to goodness real world Hell because he runs this blog, and being sensitive is where you wind up after going through real life crap that would be more than enough to scare the shit out of me.

    thor, as annoying as he is, is usually fun to spar with because he has a glass jaw, so to speak. Unfortunately, Karl, who I think is great, couldn’t take thor’s warrantless razzing. If only Karl had asked us, he would have known that 99% of the people here see thor for what he is, and just kinda giggled at his completely unfounded charges of racism against Karl.

    Too bad, because I, and a lot of others here, miss Karl’s posts.

    Some people here know my name, and that doesn’t bother me. But I use Lost Dog at other places, too, and you can bet most of them don’t get my real e-mail. Jeff has it, and knows my name, as well as Dan, B. Moe, and a few others. I have even put it in a comment once because I couldn’t figure out how else to give it to someone I wanted to get in touch with.

    PW doesn’t scare me as much as some other places, but if I were Jeff, I would be very leery of stalkers, especially after what he has been through.

    BTW, and OT. As liberal as my area is, I didn’t hear one person today who wasn’t laughing down their sleeve at the DemVention and Obama.

  56. Mikey NTH says:

    Yeah, Carin. It is real simple once you know. Like an old country house murder mystery. It all makes sense once the villian is unmasked.

  57. SarahW says:

    I know what you did last summer.

  58. N. O'Brain says:

    ” Like an old country house murder mystery. It all makes sense once the villian is unmasked.”

    My brother-in-laws sister writes those kinds of mysteries, won the Agatha Christie award for her first book.

    She must have 6 or 7 pusblished now.

  59. guinsPen says:

    I would feel fine sharing my personal information with the regular commenters here

    So… like, you got a pool over by there?

  60. Darleen says:

    I post under my birth/legal name. Really. “Click” is a real name. I took it back when I divorced and kept it even after I remarried. This way my husband remains relatively anonymous (he doesn’t participate on political blogs, but has a web presence as a photographer). My daughters and grandkids have different last names from mine, Though I have said their first names from time to time.

    I believe a lot of blog etiquette is an on-going project, and it is totally voluntary. But one has to accept the risk that everything one puts out on the net is fair game to be distributed. There just cannot be an expectation of privacy in any kind of commentary community.

  61. Dana says:

    I normally use just Dana, but if you follow the link back to my site, you get my full name.

    I’m not well-known enough to have attracted people like the lovely Dr Fritsch you have, so I haven’t had to deal with the problems. But it seems to me that, by hosting an open comments forum, allowing pseudonyms to be used, and pretty much having a promise that e-mail addresses won’t be published, a blogger like me, who does not have a stated policy of unmasking anonymity for abusive commenters, is stuck between keeping a promise of anonymity for the abusers or breaking one’s word.

    (Of course, I have one commenter who uses the e-mail address of not@home2u.com, which is obviously bogus, and WordPress can’t tell that it’s phony. He’s a decent guy, so I don’t worry.)

    In publishing a blog, we are, in effect, removing the societal protection of silence from ourselves. People who don’t speak out don’t normally get bothered; that is a protection we have voluntarily surrendered.

    This seems to me to simply be a risk we willingly assume, and there’s nothing that we can do about it, other than to be silent; that isn’t much of a choice.

  62. Darleen says:

    Now, as someone who hails from several years involved in law enforcement, there is obnoxious behavior and stuff that starts to edge into criminal realm. The l’affair Debs definitely moved into “time to start a papertrail with the cops” territory AND never never take the word of the first cop you speak to that “it’s not our jurisdiction.” Too many cops are ignorant about law concerning cyber crime/stalking/harassment. MAKE ‘EM TAKE A REPORT!

  63. geoffb says:

    “(Just kidding, buddy. I’m glad your parents decided not to name you “Jeff,” however.)”

    I like it now but not as a kid. Mom was an English teacher with an attraction, so to speak, for 14th century literature.

  64. Ric Locke says:

    ::sob::

    I use my real name, or the variant thereof that I have been using for [counts on fingers, then toes, then starts over…] forty-two years. Nobody should have any trouble finding me.

    But I don’t get hate mail. I don’t even get much spam. It makes me feel sad.

    Regards,
    Ric

  65. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    Ric, if it makes you feel any better, I’ll send you a scathing email threatening to tie your dog’s legs in a knot. And if you don’t have a dog, I’ll make an attempt at the Jackass. Of course I won’t mean it, but hey, I don’t like good people feeling sad.

  66. Carin says:

    Ric, if it makes you feel better, I don’t get ugly emails either. I have gotten a few nasty comments on my blog, and one kinda has a weird/stalkerish knowledge about me. But, not really that exciting. I kind of think perhaps it’s someone I know IRL who doesn’t have the balls to post under their real name.

  67. […] Flashback: “Internet privacy: rights vs. privileges (an open forum … […]

  68. McGehee says:

    Jeff B. and geoffb both can probably sympathize with why I don’t use my first name routinely on the internet; it’s a little known fact that 78% of all people on the internet are either named Kevin or wish they were.

    The ones who wish they were named Kevin are particularly pathetic, but being the object of their envy/worship is no picnic either.

    I can’t remember the last time I got an ugly e-mail — it may have been the ones I got in response to something I hadn’t even posted, but my comment was the only one in the offending thread (another site, not mine and not PW) that had a link the offended person could follow, so I got the venom. That woman wasn’t right in the head, and neither was her son or nephew or whoever, that the other commenters were snarking at. I doubt it was a coincidence.

  69. SarahW says:

    There was this one time, I thought my comments should be the wild west. If I ever got any.
    Then one day wild west came true, and I rethought my position.

  70. John Cheshire says:

    Carin-

    I stated that I lost a bit of respect for Karl and that he came across as weak for the way he left. I also stated that I love reading his work and found quality in his posts. My intention was not to crucify (and I don’t think I did that) but to add my thoughts on the Karl kerfuffle. Mostly because I am growing weary of seeing his name pop up as if we were some jilted lover pissed at Jeff for chasing off the third leg of a bizarre love triangle. Do I wish I could go to the Pub and read his coverage of the election? Hell yes. But Karl made his choice.

    You see, I love debate. Not because I am good at it (I am actually very bad at it) but because it’s how I learn and, therefore, shape by beliefs. I refuse to sit and watch Fox News or MSNBC and just believe. PW is a forum for real debate for all who come willing to debate in good faith and that’s hard to find. I have never agreed with thor but that’s not to say that I have not learned from him. That is not to say that he brings no value. Again, I agree with Jeff that thor is proformative and instructive. That is to say that he gives me an insight into the liberal mind and the associated thought process behind it and, more importantly, how to combat it. Every now and then he even makes a good point.

    So, for my part, I am glad Jeff decided not to ban thor because I would have lost a little respect for Jeff and I can only handle so much disillusionment at one time.

  71. cynn says:

    cynn is the original cynn. It’s my name; I don’t shy from it. But there is a lot to answer for.

  72. psycho... is on TCM right now says:

    Sorry, Ric. No one hates you. You’re the swellest guy on the internet.

    Way back in the day, when I was still me on the tubes, I never got any hate mail either, only e-dorks wanting to make e-friends — just like the meat-dorks in meat-life. Every job I’ve ever had attracts approval-seeking dweebs, and as a ragey asshole, I don’t like it. So that’s why I’m not anybody anymore. (It’s also approximately why I don’t ever quite join in the “conversation.”)

    But my reasons for being nobody have changed, e.g., I used to be surprised by how much shit Jeff gets, but that’s about what kind of asshole hates him, not what kind of asshole he is (which is not much of one). And similar assholes tend to hate me. Feeling’s mutual. Very. Except I leave them alone. Unless. So there’d be some ruckus. Worse than Jeff’s, in a way.

    That’s also why I don’t have a blog-type thing, anonymous or not, though it’d probably do all right. The trade isn’t worth it. My slap-a-bitch days are far behind me, and staying there.

  73. ThomasD says:

    There just cannot be an expectation of privacy in any kind of commentary community.

    Yep, and locking your front door at night might make you safer, but does not render you impervious. Really, anyone can be gotten to, it’s just a matter of time and effort, coupled with the will to see it through.

    Forget the 15 minutes of fame, when will everyone have 15 MB of slanderous trash in the Google cache?

  74. cynn says:

    ric: I can’t tell you how many times I’ve felt enlessened because of some soaring offhanded remark you deemed to post. Goddam your pissant abilitty.

  75. cynn says:

    OK, the helicopters aare coming back, so none of this matter atnymore.

  76. SarahW says:

    Ric has the worst case of man hands I’ve ever seen. There’s some hair I think.

  77. SarahW says:

    it all about inclusion Ric :P

  78. SarahW says:

    And I heard his forearms are muscley.

  79. SarahW says:

    And speaks in basso profundo.

  80. SarahW says:

    An does some math. A lot of math.

  81. SarahW says:

    And he speaks, not his forearms.

  82. McGehee says:

    @ #76: Cynn, sometimes your deportment is mind-bogglingly impeccable, you serial commenter!

  83. McGehee says:

    @ 83: SarahW, are you sure his forearms don’t speak? They may just be the strong, silent type. Ask them about football. Or NASCAR.

  84. TmjUtah says:

    TmjUtah came from a mash up of my old phonetic callsign and where I ended up living.

    The A.R. Jones in Orem, Utah, came from mom and dad. I began disclosing that info because that even the perception of anonymity mades it too easy for me to (a) embellish facts and worse (b) to dispense with civility. Character defects that are all mine… but I’m MUCH better now. (*rimshot*)

    I still get to do all the hand flapping catastrophe mongering that I so loathe in creatures like Sully. But I am just an unemployed guy between careers, and… it’s the inter tubes.

    I am grateful for the forums I am able to participate in, with Jeff’s just about highest on the list. The late unpleasantness has, if nothing else, reinforced how important communication is, and how blindingly fast information can translate into upheaval inside a community.

    Strong communities survive. Weak ones get the Feds to buy trailers and pay the rent for years down the road.

    I’ve had a few weird emails. It’s nice to have friends who know all that “whois” stuff, and even a select few who can come up with nifty stuff like what color the carpet was in the room where the computer lived.

    I am not important in the big scheme of inter tube hatez. The only time I ever received what I perceived to be a remotely viable threat, I called the originator at his home less than twenty four hours later and informed him that my lawyer had his email. Further, I told him and that I’d keep his private info on the top of my radar and that I’d see him first if anything untoward occurred where my family was concerned. “Untoward” being anything from Mom complaining about a car following her, an uptick in “nobody there” phone calls…

    I told him if he spent less time on the internet, maybe he’d take better care of his lawn.

    That was many years ago. I’ve not had any reason since to go to those lengths since. Probably wouldn’t do it again, truth be told. But I still like to think I’m not much of a lawyer guy, even as old and lame as I’ve become. Don’t ever threaten. You may run into somebody who grew up well and then you’ll just be in a world of hurt.

  85. one MRE too many says:

    whew, Sensitive, Sensitive. Thor took a lot more abuse than Karl ever did and he kept ticking. Karl had some good chops in the research.

    Hey, it’s not like you are Democrats like MLK or Robert Kennedy or something.

    threats to the Rightwingers are imaginary.

  86. one MRE too many says:

    meant to add Karl did well, but was proven a demanding bitch wanting the class to stop talking and worship his hind-ass. Jeff and thor’s correct on that point (I, ahmmm, ‘paraphrase’)

    oh, well, g’nite.

  87. McGehee says:

    threats to the Rightwingers are imaginary.

    Only because we have all the guns.

  88. EasyLiving1 says:

    The crazies have everything to lose: their “identity” and sense of self. Offline and in person, these people would clearly send out a “stay the fuck away from me because I might harm you at any moment” vibe; and we would all stay away.

    Except maybe Uncle Jimbo over at Black5.

  89. McGehee says:

    Thor took a lot more abuse than Karl ever did

    Thor deserves it. Karl didn’t.

    “Moral” and “equivalency” account for two of the letters in your handle. What’s the “R” stand for?

  90. thor says:

    Comment by John Cheshire on 8/26 @ 5:19 pm #
    The only thing Karl did by leaving as he did, was lend a small smidge of undeserved credibility to thor and his comments. This is to say that it would have been better for Karl to remain posting and, with the help of commenter’s here, provide thor with a rhetorical smack down every time he starts dropping turds in the comment thread.

    For the record I’m usually correct…………….. that helps the swelling go away after the shrieking wailers rap their knuckles on my chest. Their untenable priggish, gassing fits are legend.

    As far as I know, Karl may return anytime at his leisure. Jeff and I never so much as spoke a word of him, concerning him, with him, or otherwise cared to discuss his outburst at all. I’m nobody to Jeff.

  91. Silver Whistle says:

    I only use a moniker so as not to get stalked by some psycho hose beast. At least, I flatter myself that I might get stalked. Probably nobody would bother.

  92. Greg says:

    I post and comment under my real name – although this is true only on blogs. I started out in the days of Usenet and later on IRC, so that particular part of me is still pseudonymous.

    I can do this because nobody cares what I write about except myself. And whichever Malaysian Big Brother is watching me right now.

  93. The Lost Dog says:

    SW,

    This blog is pretty civilized.

    If you want hairy, check out the political newsgroups. Now that’s where the real psychos hang out. It took me about two days there to decide that my real e-mail address was not a good idea. It’s also good to find a server that doesn’t post your ISP.

    My harshest lesson was to make sure my comments weren’t being cross posted. I got dumped by one server because I didn’t notice that I was replying to a comment that was cross posted to alt.Christians (or some such).

    OOPS!.

    Even though I don’t think certain words have much to do with being a Christian, someone did, and apparently was offende by my style.

  94. Rusty says:

    #93

    “For the record I’m usually correct……………..”

    That’s comedy gold, right there.

  95. Silver Whistle says:

    Lost Dog,

    I know the patrons of this establishment are by and large decent folks, but just look at the trouble our esteemed host has had by making his real identity known. The man is like a light bulb to crazy bugs. If some dribbling, drooling psycho hose beast of a stalker was to threaten my kids, I’d have to go medieval on her ass, and then I’d lose my job, I couldn’t run for president, and life would be a drag. So, until my kids have their own firearms licenses, I’ll stick to anonymity.

  96. thor says:

    If anyone has taken offense to anything I’ve said, take I-95 to the Atlantic Ave in Delray Beach, Florida. Go East until it dead ends into A1A, you’ll see the beach and ocean. Take a right, head South. At the next light, step out of your vehicle and scream my name combined with any string of obscenities you want. It’s likely I’ll hear you. If I have nothing better to do I will come down and, after a brief exchange, send you on your way. Who knows, maybe I’ll invite you up. I’ve got an ice maker and every combination of anything you’d care to drink. You might need some ice, or a drink. Up to you, really.

    No, I’m not kidding. Matter of fact, there’s a local bar that we call “the Alley.” It’s full of off-duty cops, DEA and FBI, out of work bouncers, military, louts, potheads and poets. Ask for me there. Tell ’em you want a piece of me. They’ll probably be nice enough to give you and number and let you know where the line starts and ends. Moreover I’ve an open tab there. You’re welcome to a free beer while you wait.

  97. royf says:

    threats to the Rightwingers are imaginary.

     

    I guess when President Reagan got shot it was all just a theatrical production? Hmm! seems I remember President Ford being shot at as well.

  98. Silver Whistle says:

    Thor,

    You live off S Ocean Blvd? I hope for your sake Mr Gore is wrong about this global warming thingy.

  99. McGehee says:

    Thor imagines anyone cares.

  100. B Moe says:

    I care about open tabs, McGehee. If I am ever down that way I would definitely let him buy me a cold one or two.

  101. thor says:

    #

    Comment by McGehee on 8/27 @ 6:33 am #

    Thor imagines anyone cares.

    Sorry McGehee, I’ve just returned killing baby sea turtles on the beach, what we’re saying?

  102. Pablo says:

    threats to the Rightwingers are imaginary.

    Yeah. What’s a little mob calling for your death?

  103. Slartibartfast says:

    I’m praying Al Gore is right, because that’ll put me within about fifteen minutes of the beach. That’s close enough. Florida will lose pretty much everything south of Lake Okeechobee, inclusive. The new intercoastal looks to be St. John’s River, and the new barrier islands will probably be Titusville, Cocoa and the like. Cocoa will be beachfront, finally.

  104. thor says:

    Yes, SW.

  105. thor says:

    Cocoa? Tough crowd there.

  106. geoffb says:

    “Hmm! seems I remember President Ford being shot at as well.”

    Twice, both missed. One was Manson girl Squeaky Fromme, (spelling may be wrong). The other was also a woman but middle aged I believe.

  107. Silver Whistle says:

    My alma mater.

  108. klrtz1 says:

    I miss Karl, too.

    BTW, even as an anonymous commenter I’ve attracted a troll. Someone else posts using klrtz1 from time to time. I think he’s a Ronulan.

  109. Jeff G. says:

    claudepate.com

    You’re welcome.

  110. McGehee says:

    Geoffb, you spelled Squeaky’s name right. As for the other, that was Sara Jane Moore — also a Mansonite.

  111. SarahW says:

    Claudpate is actually a very fun site. Another side to Karl!

  112. klrtz1 says:

    Jeff, there’s no political analysis at claudepate.com.

    Well screw it. I’m not going to analyze for myself. I guess I’ll go listen to music. back to work.

  113. Carin says:

    Go East until it dead ends into A1A, you’ll see the beach and ocean. Take a right, head South. At the next light, step out of your vehicle and scream my name combined with any string of obscenities you want. It’s likely I’ll hear you

    Kewel. Fam and I are heading to Florida next month. I don’t know if I’ll be able to scream obscenities, ’cause the little ones will be with me.

  114. SarahW says:

    I think a girl who watched enough star trek would have kicked Charlie Manson’s ass instead of shooting at presidents for him.

  115. SarahW says:

    Carin: “Hey, Free Turtles!” might work.

  116. Dave D says:

    Outside of the legal issues inherent in dealing with an actual stalker the way Jeff has, what this really boils down to is the half-assed version of confrontation that the internet permits. We all know it’s a lot harder to make a nasty personal attack to someone’s face in meatspace than it is in a comments section online.

    In meatspace, there are consequences, some of which can get particularly messy. And the sort of person who’ll call you a failed academic hausfrau or a racist online is EXACTLY the sort of person who wouldn’t dare do it face-to-face. The very act of typing it out proves to the world that you are indeed a coward. Because the kind of person who’d make you regret saying something like that face-to-face usually isn’t going to posture the way you have: he’d just act. But you can’t do that online.

    So how to balance the inequity? How to create some sort of consequence for those who hide behind the walls of distance and anonymity to make personal attacks? You’ve got to make them regret it somehow, otherwise they’ll keep doing it.

    Anyway, as usual, I’m late to the party.

  117. Squid says:

    Carin: you could just scream “Thor!” I know it’s become an obscenity in my world.

  118. Swen Swenson says:

    I’ve missed all the fun again, haven’t I? Even showed up too late for the leftover beer. That’ll teach me to be out hiking in the canyons instead of surfing the ‘tubes.

    I certainly understand why some folks post and comment anonymously — there’s a lot of scary people out there and no point in inviting trouble. But scary people don’t bother me much ’cause I figure I’m fairly scary myself. I’m also self-employed, so I’m not going to get fired for saying something stupid (good thing, huh?).

    I do generally discount the opinions of the anonymous, at least until I get to know them. However, it’s usually pretty easy to tell when someone’s posting anonymously for self-protection, as opposed to posting anonymously to get away with being an asshole. (My first clue is usually that someone’s being an asshole and posting anonymously — no great feats of perception required.)

    Ah well, sorry I missed the leftover beer, but I’m not sorry I missed the dust-up. Life is too short.

  119. geoffb says:

    Thanks McGeHee,
    I couldn’t remember her name, also didn’t know she was part of the Manson cult.

    As far as those cultists go I recommend the film “Manson” from 1973 a documentary.

    Cults, all different but all the same in the end.

  120. geoffb says:

    Oops, no capital H.

  121. Sdferr says:

    Sara Jane Moore is the right name but she wasn’t a Mansonite. Crazy fuck though, looney toons.

  122. McGehee says:

    she wasn’t a Mansonite.

    Are you sure? I remember the coverage at the time and I distinctly recall that she and Squeaky had more in common than a presidential assassination EPIC FAIL.

  123. John Cheshire says:

    Comment by thor on 8/26 @ 11:44 pm #

    For the record I’m usually correct

    …..and has a lousy sense of humor.

    There! Finished.

  124. Sdferr says:

    Pretty sure McGehee, though I could probably stand to check. I thought she was just an extreme political crazy of the sort we see too often these days.

  125. geoffb says:

    Re: Sarah Jane Moore from Wiki.

    “In Stephen Sondheim and John Weidman’s musical Assassins, Moore is portrayed as a flaky accident-waiting-to-happen who can’t wield a gun properly;….The interactions between Moore and Fromme presented in the musical, which include smoking marijuana and firing off pistols at a bucket of fast food, are entirely fictitious, however.”

    Perhaps because of the only 17 days between the attempts and this musical that had their characters interacting there is an air that they acted together.

  126. Sdferr says:

    Could be something about that musical geoffb cause I never heard of it, so I gots no interference pattern to cloud my otherwise murky memory.

  127. McGehee says:

    I never heard of that musical either. I would’ve thought Sondheim had better things to do.

  128. […] Flashback: “Internet privacy: rights vs. privileges (an open forum … […]

  129. geoffb says:

    I read the Wiki write up. It won 5 tonys in 2004. Looks like a weird play I’ll say that.

  130. MarkD says:

    Hmm. Since I take it as a matter of faith that most jerks are cowards, I’m not too worried about anyone actually attempting to physically harm me, or my family for that matter.

    However, the PC police at most large organizations would probably google the name of a prospective employee. Why risk having some anti affirmative action comment potentially cost you a job? I do remember writing somewhere that there are certain educational majors that might indicate a tendancy toward grievance mongering, to the extent that I view them as disqualifications. I’m sure official HR policy doesn’t allow me to say that or act on it, but…

    I actually did get one insulting e-mail from some idiot in response to a comment I posted somewhere. I should have kept it. Being ignored is worse.

  131. buzz says:

    Sarah Jane Moore was batshit crazy. She grew up in the same town as Charles Manson and I might have known him there. The saddest thing about the assassination attempt was what happened to the young marine who knocked her hand away. His parents didn’t know he was gay, but the mayor of San Francisco outed him as a gay hero and and the national media, against his wishes, also outed him. His parents cut off all contact with him. They apparently reconciled before his death almost 20 years ago. Possibly saved the presidents life, and people with an agenda destroyed his.

  132. Sdferr says:

    Goddamn it. That’s just another one of the sort of things that…………aw fuck it.

  133. Ed Davis says:

    But my REAL name is “Blitz”

  134. Blitz says:

    oops..

  135. Blitz says:

    “Ask for me there. Tell ‘em you want a piece of me.”

    Thor? Usually when seeing this from an adversary, I’d laugh and point at his tiny little man-parts.However? in THIS case, I’m just going to point and laugh…

    Oh…SHUTUP THOR

Comments are closed.