anonymity == no big whoop

[manfredvonrichthofen]

You literally can't google my name without me being in the top ten. I don't mind people knowing who I am and what not. Everyone around here does. Most here on CAPtalk do not however know my name. I have TRIED... I say again TRIED to be respectful with my posts. I do however have some views and opinions that are really really... really......... REALLY one sided. With those I try to be tactful and respectful with those posts, but they still come very harsh so I edit and edit... and edit to try and make it as easy to not vommit out your ears thinking, this guy is a ...

My name is Robert Killion.

[addo1]

I can see both sides to this issue.

On the side of claiming your posts, it makes sense. When you post something, YOU and you only should own the post and be responsible for any outcome that it brings. If you go anonymous, it will trick yourself to think you can post whatever you want without consequence. Again, anytime your name is googled, You will claim that post.

On the flip side, posting anonymously can be used for a variety of purposes. If you are wanting to protect your privacy, posting as an anonymous user helps that. This would provide opportunity to say things that you do not mean though. It can also be useful for some ranking officials to see what people think without creating an official presence.

For myself, it is a learning experience for me. I look back on my posts and see some that I am not proud of years back. Again, that just adds to learning from my mistakes.

As for internet privacy, I am willing to stand up for myself. Anyone can look my name with a CAP tag and find pages of stuff regarding CAP, education, and community work. It both adds to my resume, but also makes me responsible for my actions.

[Chappie]

I have chosen to use a pseudonymn due to the desire that I want to be able to post without people thinking I might be speaking in an official capacity since I have served on command staffs at both Wing and Region level.  I know Ned Lee can post and not be accused of that .... I know Ned Lee .... but I'm no Ned Lee

Though I have chosen to use the veil of anonymity...many of the CAPTalkers know who I am.  And as stated by other posters, in my time on CAPTalk, I have not used that veil to violate the principles found in the Core Values of CAP. 

[Eclipse]

I know Ned Lee can post and not be accused of that .... I know Ned Lee .... but I'm no Ned Lee

When Chuck Norris posts on CAP Talk, his handle is "Ned Lee"...

[dwb]

Wow, I go away for a few days and my thread from four years ago comes back from the dead!

For those wondering, I still hold the same opinion on this topic.  The only difference is that my name is in my sig now.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Most of the hits on my name lead to CAP News or CAP based forums. I'm fine with that. I think the stories that have included my name would bring credit to it when it comes to people like employers looking it up.

[Smithsonia]

Acting with honor is doing in private what you do in public. Of course this "ol saw" is
a little simplified because we all have personal business, relationships, physical functions
and habits that are meant to be only private. However, if in life, we keep our identity hidden,
if we allow our discretion to be corrupted by our anonymity, then we are not honorable.

Every bank robber in a ski mask is not a skier. How to tell the robbers from the skiers is our question. 

We are all human. Humans make mistakes and humans are, well... human.
Live behind your screen name and you may be human. But, your humanity is tougher to judge.

You may think you can cut a corner on your logic, smear through innuendo,
not edit your thoughts, become snide out of habit. and be smug, arrogant, and foolish.
This is unbecoming. This is a misuse of the anonymous privilege.
When the screen name is a dodge for ownership of your writings, then it is an act of dishonor. 

I never write what I can not sign. I never write what I can not defend. I never
write what I don't believe. By the way don't misconstrue this to mean that I am always right when
I write. Sometimes I write as a reality check. This essay may be one of those times.

So to this point. Some of us have as ethical behavior attach our real names to postings- Some don't.
To the anonymous - don't take liberties. Using the perverse logic of the lazy, this tendency
to shoot from the hip easily creates great and fast mis-judgements.
On both the part of the writer and the reader.

This proclivity can lead to mob mentality as the screen name provides easy and convenient cover.

Personal Responsibility is now the crux of this matter.

In this manner a hooded robe may clothe a holy monk or a KKK member. A Burqa may
cloak a woman for discretion or may allow a terrorist to pass unchallenged.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burqa

I am not against anonymity per se'. I am against allowing screen names to be used to dodge
personal responsibility. I am against anything that allows the mitigation of personal responsibility.

I have watched innocent people... and in this I don't mean cadets... but actual
innocents berated and discredited, here.

On Saturday we had an ethical discussion regarding a PAO who's name was attached
to a story. However, he didn't put this story on this website. He was not part of the discussion. He made no
choice. He was an innocent to the discussion. However, there were three anonymous Captalkers who took shots
at him. I think in this context this is a immoral act and appeasement is perverse.

I've seen pictures posted by third parties and gigs about the uniform piled on. This was done while the persons in the picture
have no idea that a discussion about them is taking place. When this is done with your name attached then it is disrespectful. When it is done under a moniker this is immoral and abusive.

A better thing might be to make a choice and post a picture of yourselfand state - "this is how to wear a uniform, whatcha think?" - then wait for the responses. This is an act of a responsible person. We can learn just as much when we act morally. You make a choice. You stand your ground. You are better for it. We all should be better for it. I don't think I've ever seen this particular picture here.

I am always for free speech. I am always for personal responsibility. This discussion is actually about
the balance between these two, at times, divergent virtues. One of the ways to judge any of us is through
our identity. Transparency of identity makes for better thoughts and actions, sometimes - perhaps most of the time.
Certainly not all of the time. However, hiding from personal responsibility is almost always a corrupting influence.

It is the thing that drove HG Wells "Invisible Man" to madness - not the drug he took - but the power of invisibility
he possessed.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Invisible_Man

This cautionary tale is worth considering.

If the internet was the wild west and we all at one time had Pecos Bill, Wild Bill, Billy the Kid,
and Calamity Jane monikers - I ask the question. Is that still the case? Is this forum the proper place
for this continued practice?

My real name is below.

[N Harmon]

My only comment on this is that anyone who believes they are anonymous here or anywhere else on the internet is kidding themselves.

I think you can take reasonable steps to ensuring the privacy of your identify on-line such that it would be outside the capability of just about everybody to find out who you are. Some of my friends in China, Iran, and Cuba even bet their lives on it.

[Майор Хаткевич]

My only comment on this is that anyone who believes they are anonymous here or anywhere else on the internet is kidding themselves.

I think you can take reasonable steps to ensuring the privacy of your identify on-line such that it would be outside the capability of just about everybody to find out who you are. Some of my friends in China, Iran, and Cuba even bet their lives on it.

With the right tools, anyone online can be tracked down. When it comes to places like you mention...there's not much you can hide online, since the internet they get is monitored anyway.

[vmstan]

I know Ned Lee can post and not be accused of that .... I know Ned Lee .... but I'm no Ned Lee

When Chuck Norris posts on CAP Talk, his handle is "Ned Lee"...

Actually, Chuck Norris was going to post on CAP Talk, but then he saw Ned Lee, and ran. That's how awesome Ned Lee is.

[Eclipse]

My only comment on this is that anyone who believes they are anonymous here or anywhere else on the internet is kidding themselves.

I think you can take reasonable steps to ensuring the privacy of your identify on-line such that it would be outside the capability of just about everybody to find out who you are. Some of my friends in China, Iran, and Cuba even bet their lives on it.

Not a bet I would take, personally, however not remotely the same situation.

[Thunder]

Smithsonia should make fortune-cookie inserts

Acting with honor is doing in private what you do in public.

if in life, we keep our identity hidden,
if we allow our discretion to be corrupted by our anonymity, then we are not honorable.

Every bank robber in a ski mask is not a skier. How to tell the robbers from the skiers is our question. 

Live behind your screen name and you may be human. But, your humanity is tougher to judge.

When the screen name is a dodge for ownership of your writings, then it is an act of dishonor. 

To the anonymous - don't take liberties. Using the perverse logic of the lazy, this tendency
to shoot from the hip easily creates great and fast mis-judgements.

In this manner a hooded robe may clothe a holy monk or a KKK member. A Burqa may
cloak a woman for discretion or may allow a terrorist to pass unchallenged.

It is the thing that drove HG Wells "Invisible Man" to madness - not the drug he took - but the power of invisibility
he possessed. 

[RADIOMAN015]

Which brings me to my second point, and the Core Values tie-in.  Regardless of a person's real identity, rank, and credentials, we should all (as CAP members abiding by our Core Values) treat and be treated with a certain baseline level of Respect.

This is a private board, and the owners/moderators determine what is acceptable to be posted here.  :clap: This website isn't owned or controlled by CAP nor is it CAP policy that allows it to prevail. 

When you or I are wearing a CAP uniform & attending a CAP function or are representing CAP in the community, than surely I would agree to complying with every CAP policy.  Lets not start over extending CAP's (or perhaps some CAP members) "fantasy land" of total member control into discussion groups via some sort of censorship or the threat of 2b action.  CAP is NOT the military, most CAP'ers are NOT real (military) officers, but CIVILIANS who volunteer their time for specific purposes that CAP as an organization accomplishes.  We aren't on duty 24 hours a day, and realistically can voluntarily choose when we want to be on duty on behalf of CAP.

I think screen names are a very good thing since it does offer some privacy.   Gee I still find my legal name on things way back when Al Gore invented the internet and I was naive to the power of a search engine.   It is just amazing to me some of the things that still remain on the internet historically.

BTW all of you can assume that while posting here I'm "off duty" from CAP, and none of this is officially representing the view of CAP but only my personal opinion.   Lets face it some members do some funny things that get in the press, and I will continue to find & publish these.

"OVER & OUT"
RM 

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Sir,
As Level one says, should we not strive to live up to the core values in our every day lives?

BTW... Al Gore didn't invent the internet.

"Despite what he may have said, Al Gore did not invent the Internet. The Internet was invented in the United States  during the late 1950s to the 1970s by a group of researchers and scientists at the newly formed Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) after the former Soviet Union launched Sputnik. Realizing that the United States had suffered a great technological blow by allowing the USSR to hold the first successful satellite launch, ARPA set out to create a brand new technology unlike anything that had ever been done before; and the Internet was the result of their hard work." (Unknown Author) Even Bill gates doesn't try to claim the internet, even though Macintosh was the first company who provided internet capable computers to the public.

[Smithsonia]

I am sure online privacy is a legitimate issue for many of those on this thread. However...

I wonder how many of those claiming their privacy have Myspace/Facebook/Twitter accounts too? So this is a fair if provocative and rhetorical question, I suppose. Rhetorical because I don't expect honest answers to be posted. Provocative because it makes your point untenable. Doesn't it?

I know of two people on this thread living in this personal privacy paradox. Any more?

[Майор Хаткевич]

I know of two people on this thread living in this personal privacy paradox. Any more?

It's not really a paradox.

A SM with the right access can get a lot more data about me than strangers on my facebook can with the settings I use.

That said, my name is all over these forums, I just don't attach it to my signature, but a search on the username is sure to bring it up.

[dwb]

We aren't on duty 24 hours a day, and realistically can voluntarily choose when we want to be on duty on behalf of CAP.

I agree, but that's not the point I was making.

My point was that, regardless of one's anonymity (or CAP rank, if not anonymous), there ought to be a basic level of respect and courtesy.  You are communicating with fellow human beings after all, even if you're doing so on an informal web forum.

It's like the customs & courtesies thing.  Cadets get all wrapped up in the minutia of saluting, titles, rigid hierarchy, etc. and miss the bigger point.  C&C are like manners -- it's something you do because you're supposed to be nice to people.

While we're not "on duty" here, I would also like to think we don't all have a license to be as dishonest, selfish, lazy, and disrespectful as we want, just because the core values don't technically apply right now.  Being a good person is something we should always strive for.

[DakRadz]

I know of two people on this thread living in this personal privacy paradox. Any more?

It's not really a paradox.

A SM with the right access can get a lot more data about me than strangers on my facebook can with the settings I use.

That said, my name is all over these forums, I just don't attach it to my signature, but a search on the username is sure to bring it up.
[/quote]

Agreed with all except I don't put my name on posts. My Facebook is locked down fairly tight.

If a SM really wanted to find me, it's pretty easy. But those who don't have those resources (non-member lurkers... those kicked out... random lurkers...) are the ones I don't like to have my name.

While we're not "on duty" here, I would also like to think we don't all have a license to be as dishonest, selfish, lazy, and disrespectful as we want, just because the core values don't technically apply right now.  Being a good person is something we should always strive for.

Agreed, though I submit that we are never off-duty from the core values.

[Eclipse]

When you or I are wearing a CAP uniform & attending a CAP function or are representing CAP in the community, than surely I would agree to complying with every CAP policy.  Lets not start over extending CAP's (or perhaps some CAP members) "fantasy land" of total member control into discussion groups via some sort of censorship or the threat of 2b action.  CAP is NOT the military, most CAP'ers are NOT real (military) officers, but CIVILIANS who volunteer their time for specific purposes that CAP as an organization accomplishes.  We aren't on duty 24 hours a day, and realistically can voluntarily choose when we want to be on duty on behalf of CAP.

You can pretend that is how it works all you like, however that won't change things if you do or say something which discredits CAP publicly (or worse).  The regs and the oath about behavior are very clear.

[Thunder]

I am sure online privacy is a legitimate issue for many of those on this thread. However...

I wonder how many of those claiming their privacy have Myspace/Facebook/Twitter accounts too? So this is a fair if provocative and rhetorical question, I suppose. Rhetorical because I don't expect honest answers to be posted. Provocative because it makes your point untenable. Doesn't it?

I know of two people on this thread living in this personal privacy paradox. Any more?

We want our privacy to protect us from creepy stalkers like yourself. You need a better hobby than trying to ban the anonymity of the internet. You are literally "sweeping the beach"

Bottom line is, people get to choose who to share their info with. Its perfectly fine to share your personal life with friends and family and not *supposed* CAP members on a message board.