Home > Uncategorized > Happy Thanksgiving, anonymous

Happy Thanksgiving, anonymous

Regular Humboldt blog readers will notice that SoHum blogger Eric Kirk moved his blog from Blogspot to WordPress.  We applaud the move and look forward to the rebirth of SoHum Parlance.

Discussion surrounding the move brought up issues we at the Herald have pondered for some time, and have solicited reader advice about in the past: anonymous comments.

As it stands, comments can be posted to the Humboldt Herald without leaving a name or email address.  (However, comments are subject to moderation).  While this method allows for the greatest amount of participation, it can also drag the discussion into a mire that many people don’t feel inclined to slog through on their search for intelligent dialog.

anonymousOne commenter on Eric’s blog said they liked the avatars on WordPress blogs that appear alongside the commenters name (or pseudonym) so that readers can tell anonymous commenters apart from one another.  But there’s a secret to how that works — commenters have to fill out the email field, otherwise the icon defaults to the over-seen green monster (at least on this blog).

WordPress recently added a feature allowing embedded polls, so in celebration of Eric’s new blog, we’ll try it out.  You can elaborate in the comments to let us know what you think about adjusting comment moderation to require an email address.

Thanks for your participation and have a pleasant holiday.

  1. November 27, 2008 at 1:24 am | #1

    At first I thought it was ok to swim through a ocean of BS to get ounce of truth. It is true that people are more inclined to be honest about their feelings if they have no investment in speaking. But I have watched this freedom turn into a circus of attacks and inflammatory accusations towards those people who believe that a person stands by his words or he is silent.
    I’ve heard so many statements and opinions that are obviously from people who are involved in the issue at hand. So, it is true that we are not going to hear from people closely involved, if they can’t be anonymous. But does it do any good? I don’t think so now. Now I think that if the speaker won’t give their name, then their words are meaningless. It doesn’t matter if “Deep-Throat” has the skinny’ on the latest controversy; we can’t believe anything he says.
    The level of rhetoric coming from Anonymous, is usually swimming near the bottom of the pond. I won’t miss them. Whenever I’ve heard the statement: “..it’s what he’s saying that is important, not who he is.” I just want to scream out: “Nothing he says has any importance whatsoever, if he will not say who is speaking!”
    So my humble suggestion is dump the anonymous, they muddy up the waters with cowardice.

  2. Mr. Dingleberry
    November 27, 2008 at 2:31 am | #2

    Nothing he says has any importance whatsoever, if he will not say who is speaking. [...] It doesn’t matter if “Deep-Throat” has the skinny’ on the latest controversy; we can’t believe anything he says.

    Let’s distinguish your argument. You’re not making Heraldo’s valid argument that anonymous people make distinguishing voices in the room difficult.

    You’re suggesting that any fake name is rubbish. That’s pretty funny coming from someone who calls himself Moviedad.

    As for Heraldo’s question, there is little difference between making a user write a name and e-mail address in the form and letting him leave those fields blank. So long as you are not validating the e-mail address (e.g., requiring logged in accounts), you’re having us jump through a hoop that takes all of 5 seconds to accomplish. It shouldn’t decrease anonymous comments except among the exceptionally lazy, so, hey, do it if it makes you feel better.

    It’s kind of like a thermostat in an office building. The damn thing is disconnected. They let you adjust it every day because it makes you feel better and you complain less about the room temperature.

  3. November 27, 2008 at 8:05 am | #3

    I don’t know if this sounds more or less totalitarian (I understand asking your readership about something like this before imposing new rules), but frankly I would simply delete comments that are just insults or threats against another reader. Of course, that adds police work on your side. I’ve noticed from time to time that comments get put into a moderation queue. I think that’s a reasonable precaution.

    On the other side, I really think the “Wild West” nature of this site probably helps to keep it popular… but at a cost.

    I would never require registration on my site simply because 90% of the people who might comment would never bother doing that. However, since your site is on the WordPress network, people who sign up for a WordPress account on your blog are also signing up for many other blogs

    While I don’t have an answer hopefully that is all some food for thought.

    By the way, one of my other incarnations is that of a computer geek and I know WordPress very well, and have written themes and plugins. If any of the local bloggers (and I do mean any) ever need some WordPress help or advice, I’m admin _AT_ noblelie (DOT) com.

  4. 06em
    November 27, 2008 at 8:12 am | #4

    The poll is unclear.

    Choice 1 (Leave as is) uses the term anonymous in a way that includes those who comment under a pseudonym, like me, those who comment under the repetitive (and confusing) anonymous, and those other water muddiers who comment under an identity established by someone else or an identity very close to someone else or just jump around from name to name as is required in order to not be inconsistent in their comments or to make it seem their opinions are shared by others.

    Choice 2 (require an email) would still potentially include all of those above. The only difference I see is that the moderator would be able to semi-identify commenters. That doesn’t really help the discussion threads very much, unless Heraldo was to jump in every time a thread participant changes identity.

    Choice 3 (require a name of some sort) would separate the anonymous user name from the above mentioned other forms of anonymity (sp?) but doesn’t seem to specify any consistency in other names a commenter could use. Could you still switch names? Could you still use names like Heralto or Rob Arkley or Anonymouse?

    Choice 4 (registered only) would, I guess, allow someone to register under one single user name – disallowing multiple users of the same name – but you don’t clarify if someone could register under multiple identities from the same ip and you don’t say if the registered name would be password protected.

    Not to be all nitpicky, Heraldo, but this poll is unlikely to be informative.

  5. Seconding 06em
    November 27, 2008 at 8:39 am | #5

    06em has it correct. All these forms can be defeated by sophisticated bloggers. Best to leave it alone.

  6. OMG I need a Pseudonym
    November 27, 2008 at 9:15 am | #6

    Well speaking as one who posts respectfully (if sometimes snarkily) under “Anonymous” on this site, I will stand up for the right to be myself, or should I say not be myself, and in any event I will accept your gracious Happy Thanksgiving wishes, Heraldo, and wish the same to you.

  7. November 27, 2008 at 9:22 am | #7

    Happy Thanksgiving, whoever you are!

  8. November 27, 2008 at 10:07 am | #8

    If you name has no blue link, it don’t matter what you think.
    Oh, sorry.
    Seriously, I don’t really care one way or the other, and I’m not going on a campaign against anonymous postings on a site whose administrator is anonymous. I just think it’s sad that people express their opinion, and hide.
    Mr. Dingleberry, if that is your real name, ‘Moviedad’ is registered to me, if someone wants to find me, it’s only a click away.

  9. Iron Knee
    November 27, 2008 at 10:10 am | #9

    Heraldo, why would you require the commenters to identify themselves when you are afraid to come out of the closet about your own identity?

    Furthermore, anybody who is looking for intelligent diolog would be better suited to go watch daytime soap operas.

  10. November 27, 2008 at 10:19 am | #10

    I did not suggest people should identify themselves, except perhaps as something other than “anonymous.” So many people posting as “anonymous” can make the conversation confusing. Are you arguing with one person or six. Readers have no idea.

    Of course, that is not to stop people from picking a different handle with ever comment, but I bet serial anonymi would bore of that chore quickly.

  11. McKinleyvillan
    November 27, 2008 at 10:50 am | #11

    If you want to kill the often-interesting dialogue, then go ahead, require email addresses. A quick peek at the North Coast Journal blog, KlamBlog, and other blogs where email addresses are required shows just how many people comment in that setting.

    Sure, sometimes people say outrageous things because no one knows who they are, but lots of unanonymous people say outrageous things too. Plus, there are plenty of people who can only say the things they do because they are anonymous–in such a small town, anonymity is hard to come by!

  12. November 27, 2008 at 11:02 am | #12

    Sorry about the multiples.

  13. November 27, 2008 at 11:06 am | #13

    The first football game of the day is crap.

    Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving to you H, and all of the anonymous, and non-anonymous alike.

    -boy

  14. Plain Jane
    November 27, 2008 at 11:07 am | #14

    Pseudonyms make discussions flow better whether they are changed often or not. Responding to and getting responses from anonymi gets confusing since there is no way to tell if they are the same one or multiple.

    Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

    This year I am ever so thankful our next president has a superior intellect. Hope for a sustainable future returns.

  15. November 27, 2008 at 11:12 am | #15

    Happy Thanksgiving Heraldo!

    Don’t change anything, I like your blog as it is.

    Blog on!

  16. Mr. Dingleberry
    November 27, 2008 at 11:28 am | #16

    Mr. Dingleberry, if that is your real name, ‘Moviedad’ is registered to me, if someone wants to find me, it’s only a click away.

    OK, if it would make you feel better, my e-mail address is misterdingleberry at gmail dot com. E-mail me. Am I any more real to you now?

    And please, stop questioning my real name. I did not insult your parents for giving you a name that assumes you would grow up to like movies and also father children. But if you have done so, kudos, your parents must be proud.

  17. November 27, 2008 at 11:30 am | #17

    I’d be more interested in hearing from people who post anonymous about why they do so.

    I admit that I have had complete strangers greet me by name because they recognize me or Ruby from blog photos. However, I have yet to experience any sort of vigilante act.

    Why are so many people in Humboldt reluctant to use their real names?

  18. Why you sometimes have to remain somewhat anonymous
    November 27, 2008 at 12:01 pm | #18

    I know for certain some of the people who post the most insightful comments on the blogs are in positions where being identified would be possibly harmful to them (public servant, business owner, civic leader, and so on). Force them out in the open and they will disappear from the debate and it will look like those blogs where only Rose and Stephen appear in the comments.

    It is working fine the way it is, and WordPress already allows you to block the really persistent trolls.

  19. Blather
    November 27, 2008 at 12:01 pm | #19

    If it is not broken, then do not fix it. This blog seems to be working pretty well in its current format. I am more interested in what is said then who said it.

  20. Pseudoblogger
    November 27, 2008 at 12:05 pm | #20

    I agree that pseudonyms are more useful than complete anonymity when trying to have an intelligent discussion.

    Of course many commenters, anonymous, pseudonymous, or otherwise, seem either incapable of civil dialogue, or just plain aren’t interested in having any kind of intelligent discussion – they’re just interested in “scoring points” in a game that exists mostly in the minds of a few people with too much time on their hands.

    In fact, it seems to me that most blogospheric comments – named, anonymous, and pseudonymous alike – consist mostly of childish insults, baseless character assasination, attempts to stereotype and thereby dismiss others, pointless arguments over who bears the burden of providing evidence for claims and counter-claims, the endless pursuit of ancient and meaningless political grudges, ridiculously overbroad generalizations, and lame attempts to squeeze partisan advantage out of any little detail of local news, no matter how unrelated or irrelevant to the political axe-grinder in question.

    Sadly, I see this from commenters of pretty much all political persuasions, ranging from the conceited and elitist attitude so often displayed by “not a native” to the crude and often obscene little tantrums from “humred.”

  21. Humboldt Troublemaker
    November 27, 2008 at 12:10 pm | #21

    To answer “Joe Cornish’s” question I think there is one major answer to the very good question about why some people remain anonymous.

    1) The person commenting could suffer harm (position or business) combined with,

    2) The person commenting is saying something about someone with substantial power who could retaliate.

    Does that make them a coward? I think not. Just prudent.

  22. November 27, 2008 at 12:36 pm | #22

    Humboldt Troublemaker, you do not need to put my name in quotation marks. It is my real name. I post only under my real name and if you pull my blog up you can see my real photo too.

    “Thank you.”

  23. Pseudoblogger
    November 27, 2008 at 12:43 pm | #23

    I agree that the two reasons cited by “Troublemaker” are among the most common reasons for posting anonymously or pseudononymously.

    For my own part, the reason that I usually post pseudononymously is that I fit into category #1 – I have a fledgling small business that depends on customers from all walks of life, and I don’t wish to alienate maybe 30 or 40% of the readers for every issue I comment on.

    Since I don’t buy into the the dogma of either of the major political orthodoxies, I often find myself in opposition to the actions of political figures from both parties. Since so many here in the blogoshpere (as elsewhere in our diseased political landscape) seem to insist on complete and total adherence to their own point of view, it turns out that disagreeing with the True Believers on both sides on even a few points quickly makes you the perceived “enemy” of both.

    Of course, for the issues that matter most to me, I use my real name, and don’t mind taking the heat, even if it means losing some customers.

    Unfortunately, there are also some not-so-innocent reasons for shielding one’s identity to add to Troublemakers list:

    3) The person commenting is a paid agent of some party involved with the issue at hand, and does not wish to reveal that fact because this might reduce their credibility in the eyes of the readers.

    4) The person commenting is saying something both nasty and false, and would rather not answer for their libelous activities.

    5) The person commenting is taking a position counter to their actual position, acting as an agent provacateur.

    6) The person commenting has a bad reputation or negative history with their potential audience, and believes that using their own name will cost them more credibility than posting anonymously.

    7) The person commenting is making a claim that they cannot backup or a prediction that they don’t want to stand by.

  24. Humboldt Troublemaker
    November 27, 2008 at 1:10 pm | #24

    Two quick thoughts and then I have to go help prepare Thanksgiving dinner.

    First, sorry Joe about the quotes. I just did not have time to verify that was indeed your real name.

    Second, I fully agree with Pseudoblogger. I oversimplified my comments. The reasons are many and complex.

  25. 06em
    November 27, 2008 at 1:36 pm | #25

    Joe,

    I think I remember from following your blog that you are a recent transplant and retired? If I was a recent transplant and retired, I would have no problem using my real name. I’ve lived in the county for over 20 years and I have a job the precludes me from expressing myself openly without repercussions. There are lots of jobs (especially in a small town with such divergent viewpoints) that would be in jeopardy if the owner/boss/manager knew that a comment was by an employee. It may seem dishonest or cowardly to you for a person to be anonymous for these reasons, but remember you are retired and only recently local. It would be impossible to participate under my real name and ever express my true opinion about local politics — and local politics is a huge part of what makes this particular blog popular.

  26. November 27, 2008 at 1:42 pm | #26

    I dunno, heraldo, can’t tell whether this was a f- you post or a Happy Thanksgiving post, but Happy Thanksgiving anyways. Doesn’t seem to me that the anons have hurt the discussion at all.

  27. olphart
    November 27, 2008 at 2:11 pm | #27

    I have posted both as myself and as with this rather stiff assed name. I sometimes use other names for fun and frolic. I own a business and those of you who are computer savvy can probably figure it out. Don’t really care. It is entertaining poking Not a Native. Some of it is heartfelt, othertimes, I’m just being a dick. A bunch of Anons is difficult to follow, agree with that.
    Lived in the county since 1971, married a native, and turn 64 tomorrow. Happy Thanksgiving.

  28. Anony.Miss
    November 27, 2008 at 2:30 pm | #28

    People get hostile about comments and I for one would not want people who are not quite stable (I kind of think there is a higher percentage of those types who have time to blog, just my opinion) retaliating. That is just judging by some of the rude comments I see.

    I also just read an article in a recent Reader’s Digest that talked about the cruel things that are said on a blog site for college students, causing real damage, recently a rape case was talked about. The victim was listed by name, causing personal hurt to her and I would guess potentially damaging her court case with details.

    I like the idea of being able to say what you like anonymously, but perhaps Heraldo monitoring it after the fact so the conversation is not interrupted. Heraldo could remove items that were not acceptable or simply block abusers, I suppose.

    Anyway, I like a good discussion. I hope you all have a nice day and have lots to be thankful for.

  29. Not A Native
    November 27, 2008 at 3:04 pm | #29

    H, is that the royal “we” that you’all are using? OK, now you’re a plural.

    Since the headline comments on this blog are originated by H, only H know what their intent is. Its obviously not about personal popularity or notority. Until unmasked, H’s only potential fame is here, not in the real world.

    If H are after dialogue between the commenters, my feeling is that every comment should have a pseudonym. Otherwise its difficult to understand the dialogue or respond, especially when multiple dialogues are going on simultaneously.

    Of course, nothing compels an individual to use the same pseudonym each time they comment, so provocative commenters can create confusion, if that amuses them. I don’t think its a problem.

    If H. are after reaction to the headline then leaving things as they are seems OK to me.

    This issue brings up the point of what is the “ethical” way of generating comments? Should they be sincere? Are fictional or provocative comments improper? Are comments intended to inflame or elicit emotional responses not appropriate?

    Well, my personal opinion is that blogs are a communication forum and what is going on is written communication, warts and all. Real people are at times emotional, provocative, angry, immature, and out of control. Blogs can allow statements that are socially unpermitted but are nevertheless what is on people’s minds.

    So, outside of legal restrictions and H’s personal opinion of what is needed to retain their “customers”, blogs IMHO should be the ultimate “caveat emptor” media. Any posting has relation to reality only to the extent it is verifiable through objective sources. And I’m fine with that. If someone knowingly posts lies, rumors, or innuendo, personally I’m OK with that. In real life, those things are often verbalized, repeated, and fervently believed unknowingly.

  30. November 27, 2008 at 3:40 pm | #30

    HAPPY TURKEY DAY! Feast well everyone.

  31. November 27, 2008 at 4:58 pm | #31

    Well, this gave me a belly-laugh: from Moviedad: “Mr. Dingleberry, if that is your real name…” Thanks for that!

    Requiring those who want to comment sign in with an email address seems like a good idea. Yes, it’s easy enough to get around, yet it might simplify matters and weed out a few trolls, obviously not all. It seems like a good idea to take that millisecond of thought before posting — time we will all hopefully spend deciding whether what we are about to say is appropriate.

    This thread is a very interesting discussion about the value of ethos in an argument, and whether absence of ethos is what makes blog arguments interesting. An argument can carry more weight if we know who is making it.

    However, I do agree that anonymity allows people with something to lose participate in discussions, and enriches those discussions with unique perspectives.

    Absence of identity also allows us to hear perspectives and arguments we might otherwise dismiss if we knew it was being made, for example, by someone with differing political views or a stakeholder of some sort. Then again, it’s useful to know someone’s agenda before you listen to what they say.

  32. Mr. Dingleberry
    November 27, 2008 at 5:57 pm | #32

    I’m pleased you can have a laugh at my expense.

  33. November 27, 2008 at 7:43 pm | #33

    When everyone’s cards are on the table, the conversation is much more polite. It’s true, there are valid points on both sides. of course there is a time and place for anonymity. but mostly it seems a cop-out. Happy Thank you Native Americans for saving our starving miserable outpost. Let us repay you with disease and exploitation, Day.

  34. nosaint
    November 27, 2008 at 8:36 pm | #34

    I enjoy using other names for wit, but if I am presenting a position I prefer to use the primary known name here…which I am still finding. I love the anonymity and I am not a name caller. If I had to be one name I could. Twice I have slipped into anonymous to clear up my error, or support the position I had made with facts or quotes. But I felt guilty, so I stopped.
    Finding Ethos in anonymity…nosaint

  35. Kym
    November 27, 2008 at 10:41 pm | #35

    For my blog, I like people to sign in. They don’t have to use their real name. The first time they post to my blog, I have to okay what they say. After that, they can post without prior approval. For me, that asks the commenter to be responsible for what they say but allows them to hide behind an alias if they want. In theory, someone could post a sane comment the first time and then, after they are approved, rant on and on spewing ugliness and idiocy left and right. In practice it has never happened. But my blog posts tend to be uncontroversial and don’t get people too riled up.

    As a point of interest, though I’m a computer idiot and can’t figure out how to use ip addresses to know where someone is coming from, other blog owners are more savvy and can figure out a great deal from that.

  36. November 28, 2008 at 12:07 am | #36

    I hope the jury will disregard my earlier statement. Knee-jerk reaction to the pilgrim myth. I apologize for the negative comment on such a thoughtful thread.

  37. November 28, 2008 at 12:08 am | #37

    06em said There are lots of jobs (especially in a small town with such divergent viewpoints) that would be in jeopardy if the owner/boss/manager knew that a comment was by an employee.
    and Why you sometimes have to remain somewhat anonymous Said… I know for certain some of the people who post the most insightful comments on the blogs are in positions where being identified would be possibly harmful to them (public servant, business owner, civic leader, and so on).

    And this is given as a reason for allowing anonymity – even for “heraldo” to maintain his/her/its/their anonymity.

    YET – “Heraldo,” you had no compunction about outing “HumRed.” Apparently he gave his name/email address when signing in.

    If you are going to do that, you should out “Jane” “Not a Native” and all the others.

    If it isn’t going to be a fair playing filed on YOUR end, you should require names, email addresses and the full monte.

  38. Anonymous
    November 28, 2008 at 12:12 am | #38

    I dislike bullies who accuse other anonymous posters of being cowards.

    I think anyone who insults other posters by calling them cowards should be banned forever from the Humboldt Herald.

  39. Anonymous
    November 28, 2008 at 12:23 am | #39

    CPR abused anonymous posters on his blog so harshly that some of us stopped going there at all. His reward for being abusive: a blander blog.

  40. Anonymous
    November 28, 2008 at 12:39 am | #40

    Some posters who “have too much time on their hands” are retired people who choose to dedicate a fair amount of time to the Humboldt Herald because it offers a method of sharing ideas with other local people.

    As to why anyone would prefer to post anonymously, think of the truly malevolent trolls you have met online over the years (more at Topix than here, in my experience). Would you like them to know your name or anything else they might use to track you down?

    But the more powerful argument in favor of maintaining anonymity has alread been stated very well. This blog offers us a way to freely express our opinions and share facts based on our own experience. Employers in a small-town environment have a great deal of power over their employees. Expressing one’s point of view can lead to the loss of one’s job. Here at Humboldt Herald, we can share information that others need to know and we can express our opinions as truly Free Americans. It is the power of Free Speech and Free Press that until very recently did not exist in our Land of the Free.

  41. November 28, 2008 at 9:06 am | #41

    “CPR abused anonymous posters on his blog so harshly that some of us stopped going there…”

    I miss the wit and brilliant insights of Anonymous.

  42. “HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE”
    November 28, 2008 at 9:10 am | #42

    Nice Poll Heraldo.

    Anyhow, what is in a name?

    Answer = A starting point for TRUTH?

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  43. November 28, 2008 at 10:29 am | #43

    CPR abused anonymous posters on his blog so harshly that some of us stopped going there

    PLEASE! The anonymous are now the victims?

    Holy shit that is funny!

    -boy

  44. Clean Cut McDaddy
    November 28, 2008 at 11:49 am | #44

    H-

    Let’s say, for example, somebody with deep pockets / an army of lawyers believes that you have committed libel against them.

    Is it possible that your identity could come out during the discovery/litigation process?

    Do you consider defamation of character when you write your posts?

    It seems like the application of anon. bloggers to the traditional definitions of libel have not yet been thoroughly explored in the legal system. It will be interesting to see how the new media are integrated into case law.

  45. November 28, 2008 at 12:37 pm | #45

    Several lawsuits have tested these waters and anonymous blogging has been considered protected free speech.

    What army of lawyers believes I’ve libeled them, or is your question hypothetical?

  46. Clean Cut McDaddy
    November 28, 2008 at 12:51 pm | #46

    Strictly hypothetical… there are even less lawyers in town these days :-)

  47. Anonymous
    November 28, 2008 at 4:36 pm | #47

    CPR appears to be mocking this Anonymous poster, and who cares if he is?

    Boymost stereotypes Anonymous posters. Again, who cares?

    I have posted on local blogs in an honorable way, though anonymously.

    I think people who call themselves by phony names and then castigate other members of the community because they post as Anonymous are “dazed and confused.”

    Oh, yeah. My writing style is distinctive enough that anyone smart enough to turn on a computer should be able to distinguish my posts from others.

    That’s enough. I’m only going to be on this plane of existence for a limited time. If my contributions to the community conversation is not valued, I have several other ways to spend my time that will be at least as useful and possibly even more enjoyable.

    I’ll check back later. Let me know what you think, Heraldo.

  48. Anonymous
    November 28, 2008 at 5:03 pm | #48

    Oops! I said “If my contributions…is not valued…”

    What a hick I have turned out to be!

  49. November 28, 2008 at 11:39 pm | #49

    If it isn’t going to be a fair playing filed on YOUR end, you should require names, email addresses and the full monte.

    Dang typos. That should be FAIR PLAYING FIELD.

    So, is it, or isn’t it?

  50. Plain Jane
    November 29, 2008 at 9:00 am | #50

    FULL MONTE? Frontal nudity on the blogs? That is a suggestion I would expect from Kristobel but never Rose. It’s an interesting idea though. Maybe it would provide some insight into whether a poster’s anger comes from anatomical deficiencies or a legitimate grievance. You can blank out the faces if you want anonymity. :P

  51. nosaint
    November 29, 2008 at 9:23 am | #51

    I believe my little character is doing a full monte now that you point it out…and there is an anatomical deficiency! OMG! I have been revealing the reason for my outrage all along.
    Heraldo, can I please have some shades or a tv style blurring on my character to protect my anonymity?

  52. November 29, 2008 at 9:27 am | #52

    Try tweaking your email address. Maybe you’ll find a fully endowed avatar.

  53. November 29, 2008 at 1:46 pm | #53

    Anonymous posts may be interesting, but anonymous posters are boring.

    I enjoy all of the characters here, even Rose and Humred. But anonymous posts have as much character as a bot.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,161 other followers