Anonymity

[Skyray]

The subject has come up peripherally in several threads.  I tend to discount anonymous posts unless they are extremely cogent and well reasoned.  Post anonymously that Richard Anderson is a jerk, and immediately your submissions under that alias end up in my round file because I have a very strong opinion that Richard Anderson is one of the better things that ever happened to CAP.  There are some CAP leaders that you can diss without evoking my disdain because I agree with you.  But the bottom line is that you are not going to change my mind from an anonymous platform.  I do listen to logic, and my mind can be changed-- Chaplain Don and Alice Mansell did it just the other day.

For all that, there is a risk to claiming your ideas.  Someone, I believe it was Nomex, asked if you could be disciplined for what you said here.  My answer was that yes you could, and that I knew two cases of members who had been terminated for expressing their objection to violations of CAP regulations.  In an atmosphere where the chain of command is not responsive to member complaints, sometimes publishing your knowledge is the only course of action open.  But you run the eternal risk of the whistle blower.  Sometimes, as in my case, you are lucky enough to see justice done, at least partial justice.

[star1151]

Discounted in my squadron, discounted here.  <shrugs>  Doesn't mean I can't read and attempt to learn what I should be learning in real life.

[Skyray]

Discounted in my squadron, discounted here.  <shrugs>  Doesn't mean I can't read and attempt to learn what I should be learning in real life.

Actually, you were one of the cogent anonymous posters that I credit.  I understand your reasoning, and I understand your problem.

[MIKE]

The company line:

Members will not impersonate anybody else.  This includes a ban on falsely stating your grade, rank, position, membership status, or any other personal information.  Members not wishing to use their real name may choose their username as a pseudonym, but will not create and use any other false names.

Emphasis added.

[Skyray]

Mike stated:

Members not wishing to use their real name may choose their username as a pseudonym

And I have no problem with that, particularly if they have no problem with me discounting their posting.  Some of them have absolutely nothing on their profile.  And some of them will at least tell you where they are in a PM and I consider that a sacred trust. Remember me;  I am the guy that got terminated nine years ago for saying Pineda had no integrity; something the rest of you are just finding out.  First he tried to have Bob Ebaugh bar me from the Florida reflector, and when Bob wouldn't do it, he had my file flagged.  Actually, that was a mistake, because after the flag was filed he had no leverage at all to shut me up.

[RogueLeader]

I don't discount you or what you say.  Your thoughts are well spelled out.  One thing that I have found that some, not all, use anonymity as a shield- including myself at one point. I did it for the exact same reasons you are.  The point is, when a member who dishes out whatever, and won't take responsibility- as you have- is generally taken with a grain of salt.  In your case, I don't know who you are, and don't need to.  I take your posts seriously at their fair value.

[Major Carrales]

I come from a background where people are asked to stand by their words.  That one speaks their mind and gives their WORD.  That what is said behind one's back is equal to that is said to their face.

I know this is "hokey" and "provincial" to some our MODERN society, but it is what I try to live by.

I have put my real world job as a teacher on the line before for what I believe in.  When I wrong I fess up to it.  I am a creature of growth, I can change possitons of thsoe possitions are validly disproven or if a better way is discovered.

On these forums I have seen practices most destructive to our ends.  Posting rumors as "facts" and wild specualtions that become "facts."  When this is done by those that do not take credit for their work...it is called blind propaganda.  Agendism reigns.

If I know who you are and you stand by your writings, that adds to my views on your writings.  If you can't make a statement in the LIGHT, then you likely have some DARK purpose.

If you fear reprisals, then PM people beofre you post and discuss it.  If you have information that might shack things up...then make yourself known.  If you are in the RIGHT you will eventually WIN!

[mikeylikey]

I do believe we had this SAME topic last year and this year in various threads. 

I will make the same statement I have before when MY anonymity was brought into question.  PM me....and I will give you my MIL email and we can set-up a face to face if you wish.  I will not broadcast myself out for various reasons.....knowing people who would quickly jump at the chance to use what I type against me both personally and professionally.

I will gladly stand behind what I post.  If I post stats, I have the document ready to go waiting for the PM asking for proof. 

All that aside, who are any of you to demand that anyone here not post anonymously.  When the rules change and say that we have to put our name and unit down then I will. 

I am more concerned with those EX-MEMBERS who come here and discuss only one subject, i.e....their termination and those who terminated them.  I would be so ashamed to put my "dirty laundry" on view.

 

[Major Carrales]

All that aside, who are any of you to demand that anyone here not post anonymously.  When the rules change and say that we have to put our name and unit down then I will. 

I'm a Civil Air Patrol Public Affairs officer who has watched too many anonymously posted rants and agendistic posts that have been destructive to CAP as a whole.  If those people had the chutzpah to write that in thier own persona and face the music, if need be, or receive the praise.

These forums are not places to "get around" chain-of-command or post elements that violate CAP protocols.  I have seen lots of "unbecoming" discussions that result in very public PUBLIC AFFAIRS NIGHTMARES.  Why not take it to the PMs or stand by it like persons of character.

I am more concerned with those EX-MEMBERS who come here and discuss only one subject, i.e....their termination and those who terminated them.  I would be so ashamed to put my "dirty laundry" on view.

I am more concerned with these sorts that seek to stir up issues that are 1) long moot, 2) topics really only of interest to active CAP memebers or 3) take pot shots at active CAP folks from their veil of DARKNESS.

[star1151]

If those people had the chutzpah to write that in thier own persona and face the music, if need be, or receive the praise.

If I wasn't as non-confrontational as I am, there's nothing I've posted that I wouldn't say to anyone in my squadron.  I have no problem explaining things and seeking advice from outsiders, but you never know who is posting here.  At this point in time, I'm not ready for those involved to hear what I have to say.  I have no problem answering questions about who and where I am via PM to those who I KNOW for a fact are not a part of my group (yes, I said group, not squadron, because the issues I'm running into involve multiple squadrons).

And no, I'm not trying to stir anything up.  If I was into that, I'd have brought all this up in my own unit in a most unprofessional manner.  I'm simply trying to find a way that I can be an active, WANTED member.

ETA: And if that wasn't a good enough reason, I had a guy I dated in college look me up in the FAA database and find out where I live and do some borderline illegal stuff.  I don't think ANYONE online needs to know my full name or where I live.  YOU might be trustworthy, but all sorts of people can read posts here.

[Major Carrales]

At this point in time, I'm not ready for those involved to hear what I have to say.

Why, what reason have you to to hide?  Planning to overthrow something...like the government?

Think you might get 2b'ed because you want to change the number of ribbons a cadet can wear?  Think the safety program is crazed?

People who come here to post something like "I fly the CAP Aircraft without a flight release to take my girlfriends on the ride of their life" probably have serious mental issues for posting that.  That would deserve a 2b.

I have posed as myself from day one of this, I have numerous posts.  I stand my them.  I refrain from making "pot shots' at my Group/WING/REGIONAL superiors.  I try my best to post positive things, express opinions and ideas. 

[star1151]

I have posed as myself from day one of this, I have numerous posts.  I stand my them.  I refrain from making "pot shots' at my Group/WING/REGIONAL superiors.  I try my best to post positive things, express opinions and ideas. 

If you could point out where I took pot shots at any of my superiors OR posed as someone I'm not, I'd be grateful.  I am non-confrontational, and that's why I'm not ready to bring my issues up in person yet.

As far as the rest, read my edit, please.  It's a matter of security for me, beyond CAP.

[Major Carrales]

I have posed as myself from day one of this, I have numerous posts.  I stand my them.  I refrain from making "pot shots' at my Group/WING/REGIONAL superiors.  I try my best to post positive things, express opinions and ideas. 

If you could point out where I took pot shots at any of my superiors OR posed as someone I'm not, I'd be grateful.  I am non-confrontational, and that's why I'm not ready to bring my issues up in person yet.

As far as the rest, read my edit, please.  It's a matter of security for me, beyond CAP.

If you could point out where I said you did these things, I believe I was talking about myself.  The statement was that I had posted at myself from my registration and have never posted such remarks about my superiors.

You have read way too much into that.  Those are examples of things that might get you 2b'ed.

[Skyray]

Well, Mikey, I don't consider it my dirty laundry.  I consider it their dirty laundry, and their manipulation of the rules and regulations.  My major offense was that I told Pineda back in 1996 that he didn't have what it took to compare himself to a real Colonel.  I have never been 2Bed, 2Ded or even served with charges.  I need to quit talking about it or Delaney is going to claim his pool winnings.  But the thing that has kept me out of CAP is a completely illegal notice posted on my social security number in the CAP database.  Pineda has blamed all sorts of people except himself.  Only after I got a notice from Susie Parker did I know for sure who was playing with my membership.  And he nearly came unglued that it was given to me.  Apparently the squadron commander who accepted my membership application and was relieved for it wasn't supposed to let me see it.  What I post here are not rumors.  What I post here are documented experiences either of myself or people I have co-counseled with or represented.  There are many abusing power besides Pineda.  You can't really blame them, the paradigm practically invites them to abuse power.

[flyerthom]

Anonymity has a long influence in US history. Remember Publius the "author" of The Federalist Papers. I would not question the integrity of Madison, Hamilton and Jay.

That being said it can also be abused. Anyone remember usenet and alt.military.cap? Check it out on google groups. It's now a complete waste of pixels, obscenities  and flame wars.

Whether it's right, wrong or gray, it is a very sharp double edged sword. It is a tool that should be used carefully.  It can be a catalyst for change, or a weapon of mass destruction for a forum. As this is in all reality, a private forum graciously provided by individuals, it has a check on the abuses of anonymity.

I think anonymity does have it's uses but then again nobody has to take that poster serious. If I use the example of usenet again - I can point to all sorts of posts by whacked out  conspiracy theorists,  fake veterans, phony experts, and other miscreants who stalk posters who disagree with them. A reason for anonymity! But then again, these trolls get away with it because they are anonymous. 

The best way to deal with it is on an individual basis. Someone who is anonymous just to troll will out themselves eventually. Someone with true reasons for it will not slip to that level. Unlike usenet, we have fair and reasonable moderators with a professional attitude. We need to trust them with this. If we want something looked at we need only to click that report to mods key in every post. 


For what it's worth, my name can be found in the intro thread and be trailed from the post about the photo's I took at the Fosset search. Heck a couple of poster's know me in the real world.

[Major Carrales]

Anonymity has a long influence in US history. Remember Publius the "author" of The Federalist Papers. I would not question the integrity of Madison, Hamilton and Jay.

I guess then you also remember Brutus.  History show that, when the time came, people did SIGN the Declaration of Independece knowing full well it was more or less "signing their own death sentence" if they failed.

Maybe, my would be friend, we draw our theories on this subject from different historical examples. 

I assume, that if theings were different, and I were the holder of some agendistic point I might take a hidden stance.  Fortunately, I've been "in the open" long enough that peope like Kach or any number of others would call me on it.

[flyerthom]

Anonymity has a long influence in US history. Remember Publius the "author" of The Federalist Papers. I would not question the integrity of Madison, Hamilton and Jay.

Maybe, my would be friend, we draw our theories on this subject from different historical examples. 

Sounds like it. I blame it on a Jesuit education. Sent you a PM.

[Ricochet13]

Anonymity has a long influence in US history. Remember Publius the "author" of The Federalist Papers. I would not question the integrity of Madison, Hamilton and Jay.

I guess then you also remember Brutus.  History show that, when the time came, people did SIGN the Declaration of Independence knowing full well it was more or less "signing their own death sentence" if they failed.

Maybe, my would be friend, we draw our theories on this subject from different historical examples. 

I assume, that if things were different, and I were the holder of some agendistic point I might take a hidden stance.  Fortunately, I've been "in the open" long enough that Pepe like Kach or any number of others would call me on it.

Excellent historical examples.  Now they also represent two different situations. 

In the first, anonymity was necessary to remove the individual from the argument.  The argument needed to be looked at standing on its own and not dismissed because of who had formulated it.   Hamilton, Madison, and Jay used Publius to focus on the explanations being put forth to explain and defend the thinking behind a somewhat controversial document being discussed at the time.  (They may also have used it to avoid the wrath of AntiFederalists.  Tar and feathers were used freely back in those days.   )

In the second example, anonymity was not the issue as these Founding Fathers stood up and accepted the mantel of Leadership, doing so publically, not only for the crown and Parliament, but for their fellow citizens to see as well.

Both examples are part of our shared historical traditions.  I have no problem with anyone posting anonymously with only one qualification.  If you really wish me to read and think about it, put forth a reasoned argument, not a rant, not a rave, not a vent, etc. 

I will continue to remain anonymous, and try hard to follow my own advise. 

[Walkman]

Having spent a fair amount on time in various forums and social networks over the years, the main problem I see with anonymity in a community comes from flamers and trolls. My experience here seems to show a fewer number of them visit CAPTalk than in other online venues I frequent.

The usual pattern is that some one creates a profile with nothing on it, comes in and starts controversy (either a new thread or replies). They attack with barely logical arguments, never acknowledge factual arguments contrary to their position, compare respected community members with famous dictators and then *poof* disappear. I've seen it hundreds of times. In fact a once beloved community of web designers I was a part of in the early days of the internet literally died because it got overrun by trolls.

I think that when an anonymous member handles themselves maturely, makes a contribution to the community and general behaves, most don't have a problem with not knowing who they really are. Even in a debate, I think it's possible to remain nameless and credible at the same time, it's all in the way one goes about it.

I used to try and remain very anonymous online. In the recent years, I've decided to embrace the new paradigm of openness with online information. Google me, you'll see my LinkedIn profile and my Ziki profile. I blog in my real name. I'm in Facebook. Professional, I've found it to be very helpful. My biggest client found me on LinkedIn, started Googling my name and decided that I was worth calling.

[Short Field]

Anomymity is a shield that trolls, flamers, and posers hide behind.  However, it also provides an ability to discuss things in an open forum with a bit of privacy (don't laugh too hard).  I am sure Dear Abby would have a lot less letters if she published everyone's name and address.

There is another CAP related site that offers a forum for Squadron Commanders.  Nice concept but it just seems a little unwise to me for a a Squadon Commander to be airing his/her problems in a public forum - especially when the sources of the problems could be reading the posts.   

Some people have exceptionally thin skins.  So if you have identified yourself even by squadron, then a problem with your personnel officer immediately identifies the personnel officer BY NAME to everyone in that squadron who reads this forum.  Not a good way to resove issues. 

By the way, I would be more than happy to provide more personnal information to the moderators via PM and maybe to a few of the people I am posting with.  But not in a flame war and not to someone who has a rant against something we are not going to change anyway.

Short Field - cause that is the type of landings I prefer...

[Hawk200]

I tend to remain anonymous because I was supposed to have been terminated once before. The reasons were bogus, and fortunately, my immediate commander had the integrity not to completely end something I have found a great deal of satisfaction in. I turned in my card, but he kept it, and let my membership expire.

When a unit formed locally, I went and spoke to the commander, and was completely upfront about what happened. He was actually rather angry with my former wing, and felt that what they did was completely unethical. He let me rejoin, even got my old rank back. So far, he doesn't seem to think I ever deserved what I got from my old wing.

Because of that I remain anonymous. I know that the Good Ol' Boy network is still out there, and that it carries across the country. I know of members in my current wing that have been in a couple of my old ones. It wouldn't take much for some of those ghosts from the past to start haunting me now.

[MIGCAP]

I think you have to remember that we are only now seeing a little light. Regardless of your thoughts about "he who must not be named", it was simply not productive or career enhancing to state your disagreement with management, even over something as meaningless as uniforms that ere not approved by the uniform board.  Until our management proves itself worthy I strongly recommend anonymity.

[JAFO78]

I don't see a problem with anonymity. I respect anyone here. If your posting count is over 1K. I would think you know what your talking about.

After all this the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and we do have the freedom of speech. If it wasn't for the founders of this origination and the others who gave their lives for our freedoms we would not have theses freedoms today.

I remember that at CAP portal, they we very good about booting people off who started to shoot off their mouths, and I would expect the same here.

[mikeylikey]

If your posting count is over 1K. I would think you know what your talking about.

Or you have WAY too much time on your hands!  In my case, I teach roughly 3 hours of ROTC every other day, PT for 2 hours each morning, and the rest is in the office reading emails and here on CAPTALK.  If it were not for this forum, I would be doing the sudoku in the newspaper.

[pixelwonk]

I remember that at CAP portal, they we very good about booting people off who started to shoot off their mouths, and I would expect the same here.

'cept that I don't own this one like I did the other.
...but thanks.

[Nomex Maximus]

I have thought about this subject a lot recently.

If you go back and look at all my posts, you will find out who I am. That was probably a mistake on my part six months ago when I joined CAP, but the forum rules are such that I cannot now go back and delete the posts that have that information. Since my info is out there now, I cannot [censored] and moan about what leadership has done or has failed to have done, even though quite frankly issues exist that should be [censored]ed and moaned about.

After a few "heated" exchanges both here and on other forums I sort of wanted to make a point of identifying myself, in an effort to "boost" my credibility.  In real life, I don't like saying anything in private that I am not willing to say in public, or in other words, I would not say something about you privately that I would be ashamed of having you overhear.  Unfortunately, just one misunderstood or "purposely misunderstood" remark can make a real mess of this volunteer opportunity that I have here in CAP. Thus, I avoid further advertising myself on this forum.

I hope you all understand.

-"NM"

[dwb]

I already did this thread once before:

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1149.msg14447#msg14447

(actually, I've been having this argument for years, but I digress)

I moderated/administered the CadetStuff forums for about four years, from 2002-2006.  I used to get up in arms when an anonymous loudmouth would come in and stink up the place.  Turns out, it's not the anonymous part that bothered me, and in fact, people who are willing to state their name and say really dumb things are actually worse than the anonymous folks.

Maj Carrales, and other folks arguing that the anons should "reveal" themselves, I'm sorry to say that we're never going to come to agreement on this issue.  My mind has been made up; anonymity is A-OK.

[Skyray]

I posted a web site on another thread, and as always I used my identity.  There was some information on the web site about TP, and there were some articles from NOTF.  In an instant knee jerk reaction five posters, most of them anonymous, flamed me so bad about TP that the thread was locked before I could tell them that they were missing the point and the articles of interest were about Mike Pannone, Andy Skiba and Rick Bowling, individuals who are very much still a presence in CAP.

Then I got a PM from one of our mad dog cops wanting to know if I still lived in Tamarac.  No I don't, and if you have any funny ideas, I have weaponry around here that will make your Glock look like a pea shooter.

[star1151]

Then I got a PM from one of our mad dog cops wanting to know if I still lived in Tamarac.  No I don't, and if you have any funny ideas, I have weaponry around here that will make your Glock look like a pea shooter.

Sheesh, and people still don't understand why I don't use my full name.

[Skyray]

Then I got a PM from one of our mad dog cops wanting to know if I still lived in Tamarac.  No I don't, and if you have any funny ideas, I have weaponry around here that will make your Glock look like a pea shooter.

Sheesh, and people still don't understand why I don't use my full name.

No, I understand your position as I said before.  I had just hoped that we were too mature for threats.

[Major Carrales]

Maj Carrales, and other folks arguing that the anons should "reveal" themselves, I'm sorry to say that we're never going to come to agreement on this issue.  My mind has been made up; anonymity is A-OK.

Well then, I trust that the moderation of TROLLs and the like will continue to be as strong as this statement you just made.  Since you feel it your duty to single me out for flaming.

Anonymity is A-OK?, then I hope you are ready to reap what you sow.  This board's credibility is upheld by those that 1) post with their name and balance out the wacked out bits, 2) bring forth that which in in the light and stays there due to being "help accountable" for what is written and 3) very important LURKERS.

There is two types of moderation, those by the MIKEs of this world and those by the general populace.  The later will be the domain of those willing to stand and be counted as themselves...all others will be suspect from the first letter typed.

[star1151]

No, I understand your position as I said before.  I had just hoped that we were too mature for threats.

Wasn't including you in "people". :-)

Beyond the whole "don't say anything online you wouldn't say to someone's face" argument, I'm seriously beginning to wonder why some think it's a such a good idea to put identifying details on the internet where everyone can read them.  That flies in the face of everything I've ever been taught about safety and security.  From personal experience, giving anyone you don't know the means to identify where you live or work is a bad idea.

Do I sometimes wish I could post my name and unit?  Sure, if all these problems with my squadron blow over, I wish I could because I honestly have nothing to hide.  However, even then,  I'm not willing to put my personal safety at risk by identifying myself and I wonder about those who would have me do so.  They must not have daughters who live alone.

[dwb]

Since you feel it your duty to single me out for flaming.

It was more a continuation of our discussion in the U.S. CAP thread, and I certainly don't feel as though I flamed you in any way.  You're the first person that came to mind in the group of people that oppose anonymity.

Anonymity is A-OK?, then I hope you are ready to reap what you sow.

Reaped it for years as the CadetStuff admin, and I maintain that anonymity contributes to the quality of the discussion more than it contributes to the poisoning of the well.

...all others will be suspect from the first letter typed.

I guess this is where we differ.  To intentionally discount the opinion of a user you cannot associate a real name with seems (to me) to be a form of ad hominem.  You can't objectively inspect the argument because you're hung up on not knowing the person that posted it.

[pixelwonk]

...Then I got a PM from one of our mad dog cops wanting to know if I still lived in Tamarac.  No I don't, and if you have any funny ideas, I have weaponry around here that will make your Glock look like a pea shooter.

Threats, whether public or via PM, should be reported to the mod team immediately.
And as usual Johnson, you are out of line.

[Skyray]

I have asked Mike by PM to remove my profile.  I don't care if you think the threat or the response is out of line, it was from someone who has been dicing with me, and it was of the "we know where you live" variety.  Free speech cannot flourish if you insist on imposing your opinions and standards.  For what it is worth, the posted URL had a lot of information on a lot of other stuff than Teflon Tony, and the really good stuff came from a federal judge.

[Major Carrales]

It was more a continuation of our discussion in the U.S. CAP thread, and I certainly don't feel as though I flamed you in any way.  You're the first person that came to mind in the group of people that oppose anonymity.

I do not so much oppose anonymity, than I do the writings of those that hide behind it.  There are many anonymous threadsters that provide worthy fodder for debate.  However, there are those that have an "agenda to push" much to the descredit of CAP.  No, you di dnot flame me, but you seem to have, in my persepective of things, provided the match.  A "Match" is a post that, while not a flame, is a spring board for something much worse...a dogpile.

Reaped it for years as the CadetStuff admin, and I maintain that anonymity contributes to the quality of the discussion more than it contributes to the poisoning of the well.

And what have you learned?  I'll tell you what I have...the abuse of anonymity turns this, and other forums, into RUMOR MILLS instead of truly positive exchanges of ideas.  A place where people can turn a lie, into a rumor and then into a fact.

Whatis to stop that process from taking down an innocent.  Many don't see the precedent set by this whole "Pineda Affair."  The precedent that a person can, be they sinner or saint, be taken down by RUMOR instead of fact.   Where you or I could be so damaged by rumor made fact because of the stupid idead that "if I see it in more than one place it has to be the TRUTH!"

I guess this is where we differ.  To intentionally discount the opinion of a user you cannot associate a real name with seems (to me) to be a form of ad hominem.  You can't objectively inspect the argument because you're hung up on not knowing the person that posted it.

[/quote]

To have an ad hominem, you need to have the hominem...the person and knowledge of that person.  We discredit  the ad hominem because such an argument is based on the personal attack...by refusing to give validity to the individual because of who they are.

You greatly miss the point of all this.  The point is that there are those that simply post up an opinion, presented as fact...but still and opinion.  An opinion is only valued based on the person who fosters it.

Now, some Anonymity Threadsters are good about developing a "presence" and posting an fact, with link...then making an opinion.  That can be respected.  But those that come her to start trouble based on RUMOR totally destroy the validity of things posted here.

Is this CAPTALK, or would you have it be CAP-RUMORMILL to teh discredit of CAP?  Have we not enough such people posting out there?

[Walkman]

And what have you learned?  I'll tell you what I have...the abuse of anonymity turns this, and other forums, into RUMOR MILLS instead of truly positive exchanges of ideas.  A place where people can turn a lie, into a rumor and then into a fact.

To be honest, I'm not sure it's the anonymity that creates rumor mills. It's one factor, for sure, but not the only one. The very fact that we're not having this conversation over lunch at Mickey D's I think is the biggest factor in decent behavior. Even knowing real identities, it's very easy for me a the remote corner of the west to flame or threaten someone in Vermont, because I feel safe and secure in my house, in front of my computer and not face to face with them.

Proper admin of a forum is what makes the most difference IMO. Places where trolls run rampant without mods cracking down quickly disintegrate into chaos. I think the mods here do a very good job of keeping things in line.

It's sad to see that some don't feel safe in their right to free speech. We're at the forefront of a new paradigm when it comes to that. How many times do we see a company backpeddling in full crisis-containment mode because they screw3d someone and it got blogged. The fact that everyone now has a microphone to the world has become a great weapon against those that abuse power. I quite enjoy watching it unfold, actually. Its like that scene in a movie where the slimeball gets his comeuppance. 

[pixelwonk]

I regret that I have to post this here, but Skyray has blocked PMs from this moderator and this was intended and originally attempted to send as such. 

I don't care if you think the threat or the response is out of line, it was from someone who has been dicing with me, and it was of the "we know where you live" variety.

Use common sense.  Regardless of whether you care or not, you will be viewed at fault if you choose to puff your chest out and issue threatening edicts about your at-home arsenal in the public areas.   Again, if you receive a threat here, it behooves you to report it so we can deal with the sender and diffuse the situation appropriately.

Free speech cannot flourish if you insist on imposing your opinions and standards.  For what it is worth, the posted URL had a lot of information on a lot of other stuff than Teflon Tony, and the really good stuff came from a federal judge.

Free speech doesn't apply when your credibility is gone and your conduct drives away others.  Like CAP, membership here is a privilege, not a right, in spite of what you may think.  There are no delusions of grandeur here, it's just a friggin Internet forum... but like others, your conduct is monitored and you will be called out for it when you are out of line.
I strongly request your compliance.

[Mustang]

Anomymity is a shield that trolls, flamers, and posers hide behind. 

"Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views.  Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.... It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation--and their ideas from suppression--at the hand of an intolerant society. The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. But political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse."

- U.S. Supreme Court, McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 1995

[Major Carrales]

"Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views.  Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority....It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation--and their ideas from suppression--at the hand of an intolerant society. The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. But political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse."

- U.S. Supreme Court, McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 1995

This calls for truth and factual presentation of materials.  There have been posted rumors that have no grounds in fact (such as the National Commander's "Goons" forcefully clearing a restroom, allegations of misconduct betten communications personnel and suppliers of radios, speculations regarded as fact about specific persons and posted here designed to mislead).

Society? In general?   We are discussing a very specific case here in a private forum.

Also, try not taking quotes out of context, this particular Court statement is discussing the Government and methods to further free speech without rear of GOVERNMENT reprisals, i.e. the tyranny of the majority.  We are discussing the abuse of such power in a privately own public forum.  Apples to apples, Please.

[Hawk200]

I don't care if you think the threat or the response is out of line, it was from someone who has been dicing with me, and it was of the "we know where you live" variety.

Use common sense.  Regardless of whether you care or not, you will be viewed at fault if you choose to puff your chest out and issue threatening edicts about your at-home arsenal in the public areas.   Again, if you receive a threat here, it behooves you to report it so we can deal with the sender and diffuse the situation appropriately.

In all fairness, if someone threatens you and you state that you will respond to that threat, that behaviour isn't unfounded. Usually, telling someone that if they hit you, you're gonna slug them back isn't about posturing, it's about making the other person think about what they're considering in the first place. Kind of a low level version of Mutually Assured Destruction, not in the extreme, but the same principle.There may be some sticky legal issues, but it's not unfounded agression.

To make any statement to the effect of "I know where you live" is considered a threat of harm in just about any state of this union. And asking someone of their current whereabouts isn't really an attempt to play nice.

I used to joke with a good friend that "I know where you live, and I'm going to come over and drink all your beer!". The kind of message sent to Skyray doesn't seem to have the same good nature behind it.

[pixelwonk]

You miss the point.
Any such behavior is unacceptable on a publicly viewed CAP forum.
Anybody wishing to go all Bernard Goetz on someone is a problem, whether it's a threat or a retort, via PM or in public.

Especially.when.it's.public.

Let's revisit some bullet points of the Membership Code of Conduct.

Members will not engage in libel, slander, name-calling, or personal attacks.  Members will not post any hateful material about any person, unit, or organization.  There is a line between leadership examples and scenarios, or having constructive discussions about problems without naming names, and attacking others outright.  Personal threats are also strictly prohibited.

All members will respect the opinion and dignity of other members, whether or not they may be present.  Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and certainly discourse on varying opinions is excellent. However, members will not attack others based on their opinions and beliefs, regardless of whether they agree or not.

Members will only discuss matters on topic for the forum in which they are posting.  Members will not make blatantly off-topic posts or attempt to derail legitimate discussions. All topics must relate and be of interest to CAP members in a professional aspect.

The administration and staff of the discussion board will be the sole judges of whether or not any conduct violates these rules.  These rules are not comprehensive and the administration or staff may deem any other behavior or content to be inappropriate as they see fit.

"Thanks.  Have a nice day."

[Mustang]

Since when does government represent the majority?  More people voted for Gore than Bush...

[Hawk200]

You miss the point.
Any such behavior is unacceptable on a publicly viewed CAP forum.
Anybody wishing to go all Bernard Goetz on someone is a problem, whether it's a threat or a retort, via PM or in public.

Especially.when.it's.public.

Let's revisit some bullet points of the Membership Code of Conduct.

Members will not engage in libel, slander, name-calling, or personal attacks.  Members will not post any hateful material about any person, unit, or organization.  There is a line between leadership examples and scenarios, or having constructive discussions about problems without naming names, and attacking others outright.  Personal threats are also strictly prohibited.

All members will respect the opinion and dignity of other members, whether or not they may be present.  Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and certainly discourse on varying opinions is excellent. However, members will not attack others based on their opinions and beliefs, regardless of whether they agree or not.

Members will only discuss matters on topic for the forum in which they are posting.  Members will not make blatantly off-topic posts or attempt to derail legitimate discussions. All topics must relate and be of interest to CAP members in a professional aspect.

The administration and staff of the discussion board will be the sole judges of whether or not any conduct violates these rules.  These rules are not comprehensive and the administration or staff may deem any other behavior or content to be inappropriate as they see fit.

Alright, I'll accept that you deem it unacceptable.

[Pericles]

For several years I participated in a usenet forum on Scientology, and compared to here, that was a jungle.  People not only used pseudonyms, they used anonymous mailers.  And even at that, several critics of Scientology had their pets killed, got threatening phone calls, and even had private information reported to the IRS.  So I am a little particular about who has my personal information.  I can't picture anyone in a benevolent charitable organization acting that way, but there is no sense in taking a chance.

[lordmonar]

No one is saying that you can't be anonymous.  But anonymity comes with pros and cons.

On the pro side...you can be more open, up to the limits of the whims of the moderators.

On the con side...you loose a bit of credibility by being anonymous.  When "IGOTNONAME" is expounding on the benefits of his pet idea, he does not set up his bona fides.

When I took my college public speaking class that in one of the first thing you have to do to help get your message across.

So.....full disclosure or no disclosure....it makes no major difference so long as you can live the the consequences.

[Hawk200]

On the con side...you loose a bit of credibility by being anonymous.  When "IGOTNONAME" is expounding on the benefits of his pet idea, he does not set up his bona fides.

I find it hard to believe that you would question the credibility of a persons pet idea based on whether or not you know their name.

Then again, maybe not. Many people dislike it when they lack power over someone. It may sound spiritualistic, or holistic, or whatever, but names have power, and there are many people that have serious issues when they can't gain or are refused power over someone else.

[Skyray]

On the con side...you loose a bit of credibility by being anonymous.  When "IGOTNONAME" is expounding on the benefits of his pet idea, he does not set up his bona fides.

I find it hard to believe that you would question the credibility of a persons pet idea based on whether or not you know their name.

Then again, maybe not. Many people dislike it when they lack power over someone. It may sound spiritualistic, or holistic, or whatever, but names have power, and there are many people that have serious issues when they can't gain or are refused power over someone else.

Maybe that is what this is all about, Power.  I never heard about the NC's "goons" clearing restrooms.  I did hear that he took to traveling with bodyguards, but what the heck, Brittany Spears travels with bodyguards.  As for the conflict of interest issue on radio procurement,  I met the National Radio guru back when the NTIA compliant rules were a major issue, and one of his credentials was that he worked for Motorola.  I remember thinking that it was inappropriate at the time.  My skirts are not totally clean along those lines.  In 1991 and 1992 I ran a small FBO, and we did maintenance on the group 172.  I would have loved to do it for free, but my business was such that I had to charge.  I never charged more than vendor cost, but it was a conflict of interest because I was the group operations officer.  But back to the subject of "rumor." I have never posted anything here that I did not have direct knowledge of or that I didn't reveal my source.  Sometimes the source was NOTF, and you guys don't seem to be very tolerant of that source.  In fact, you don't seem to be very tolerant of anything.  So be it.

[Larry Mangum]

I tend to agree with Major Carrales, and that is why my tag line, reflects who I am and my position with CAP.  I do think there is a need for whistleblower protection however as long as it is used exactly for that and not as a means to cover your tracks while smearing or attacking others for personal reasons.    I have seen too many cases lately of people filing anonymous complaints as part of a vendetta against each other or other units in a tit for tat fashion.    Not only is that bad for the membership and the organization but it consumes resources that can be put to a much better use then investigating every little petty issue. Sometimes I think CAP's motto should just be "Grow Up!", at least in Washington State.

Just my two cents worth.

P.S. I like Major Carrales, grew up in Texas and I was taught a person's word is their bond and not to tolerate liars and cheats.

[Walkman]

You know, it's real easy for someone to type a random name and location in their sig. I'm mean truly, unless you've had a handshake, you could be talking with anyone here.

[Pericles]

No one is saying that you can't be anonymous.  But anonymity comes with pros and cons.

On the pro side...you can be more open, up to the limits of the whims of the moderators.

On the con side...you loose a bit of credibility by being anonymous.  When "IGOTNONAME" is expounding on the benefits of his pet idea, he does not set up his bona fides.

When I took my college public speaking class that in one of the first thing you have to do to help get your message across.

So.....full disclosure or no disclosure....it makes no major difference so long as you can live the the consequences.

I tend to agree, Lordmonar, but sometimes those consequences are unwarranted and unexpected.  I have always felt that discourse should be free and open, and that ridiculous ideas would get sifted out by logic.  Back when I was in college, I took a jurisprudence course that was taught by a Jesuit, and the discussion sometimes got a little wild and far afield.  Imagine my dismay when I found out that one of my classmates, who was a local law enforcement officer trying to improve himself through education, had been suspended from his job for something he said in class.  A member of the class was in his department, and instead of speaking up and telling him that his opinion was faulty, went behind his back and reported what he said to his supervisor who suspended him.  I remember from participating in another forum that you had a similar experience; at least one of the participants was braying about how they were going to do you in.  If you don't mind, how did that turn out?  FWIW my position in that discussion was that I disagreed with you, but I sure as hell disagreed with him trying to get you fired.  Seemed to be an unfair debate tactic somehow.

[star1151]

I find it hard to believe that you would question the credibility of a persons pet idea based on whether or not you know their name.

I agree.  If anyone's really THAT concerned that I post anonymously, they are welcome to email me or talk to me in person.  But I will NOT post my full name and location and find it odd that my word is worth nothing because I choose not to for my own security.  I find it incredibly offensive and if this is an attitude prevalent in CAP, it's making my decision to stay or not that much easier.

[Larry Mangum]

Anonymity to post an idea or thought for consideration is fine and can be a great way of starting a discussion. Anonymity as a way of attacking another is not.

[IceNine]

Let me throw this out there.

Is what Midway Six posts here or on CAPBlog any less credible, and accepted because he doesn't openly post his name?

A lot of us know him but, It doesn't matter much

That is just the most prominent example I can come up with.

[davedove]

I think where the problems occur is with brand new posters.  Someone comes in making a very forceful opinion like everyone should just accept what he says.  We don't know who the person is.  He could have years in CAP, be a brand new member, or just be an outsider stirring up trouble.

Once a person has been posting for a while people start to know and accept him, even if he is only known by his alias.

[Flying Pig]

By wawgcap....
"Anonymity to post an idea or thought for consideration is fine and can be a great way of starting a discussion. Anonymity as a way of attacking another is not."


I can agree with this.  As a rule, I like to attach my name to what I write.  But I can see someone who witnesses something and wants to get the word out to make people aware of something and let others do their own research. 
But like the post above, I have a real issue with people who attack others behind the curtain being anonymous.

It is true that I could be anybody, maybe not even who I say I am.  But attaching a name does give an amount of credibility. 

When your responsible for your words, you think twice about what you say.  Try doing a Google search with your real name and you may be surprised about what comes up.  Thats one of the first things our  Background Investigators do with new applicants.

Just like a felony....you will always be responsible for your past.  (I had to sneak that in there  )

[DogCollar]

Ah...it's an interesting time we live in, isn't it?  I guess I have always assumed (and that's dangerous, I know) that anything communicated via computer is not private or anonymous.  I can only speak for myself...and please, do not take offense...but adding my name makes me accountable to all of you, causing me to want to be the best "citizen" on this board that I can be.  Again, that is meant as a criticism of anyone who wants to communicate anonymously.  Rather, it helps me to engage more constructively.  That's my .02worth.

[Walkman]

I think where the problems occur is with brand new posters.  Someone comes in making a very forceful opinion like everyone should just accept what he says.  We don't know who the person is.  He could have years in CAP, be a brand new member, or just be an outsider stirring up trouble.

Once a person has been posting for a while people start to know and accept him, even if he is only known by his alias.

I really think you nailed it right there.

[Hawk200]

It is true that I could be anybody, maybe not even who I say I am.  But attaching a name does give an amount of credibility. 

Forum rules aside, would I be more credible if I put "Alfred E Neuman" as a signature? How about "John Doe"?

I think it's a somewhat naive assumption that just because a name is up, the information is credible. Our society is a bit beyond the type of honor and honesty that used to exist and permitted that belief. There was a time that such an assumption was perfectly reasonable, but not anymore.

I'm not saying that everyone should suddenly withdraw their names, but I don't think that it's really appropriate to simply ignore someone because they don't have a name up.

As davedove said, a history on this forum gives a lot of credibility among regulars. The new posters are obvious (not considering the numbers next to their name of course  ), and you can tell when someone new isn't familiar with the regulars either.

[Short Field]

Absolutely correct!  There are a uncountable number of people posing as something they are not on the internet.

My biggest reason for remaining semi-anonymous is to avoid starting minor wars with the local members.  For example, I could easily get caught up in a discussion on how to work around the old folks who are so computer illiterate they can't log on to a computer, much less do something in e-Services or on the IMU. 

If someone who knows me printed out the comments and gave it to the "old folks" there would be a lot of hard feelings.  They would feel attacked in a public forum even though I would have never said something so impolite to their faces.  Doesn't mean it isn't true, just that I would not say it to their face or in front of their friends.   AND the main point to NOT FORGET is that I was not on the forum to trash them but to learn how to work around them - or, best of all worlds, learn how to motivate and train them.

[SoCalCAPOfficer]

For example, I could easily get caught up in a discussion on how to work around the old folks who are so computer illiterate they can't log on to a computer, much less do something in e-Services or on the IMU. 

I know this has nothing to do with anonymity, however, I resent the remarks against the "Old Folks" being computer illiterate.   I am an "Old Folk"  and I have owned a computer since 1980.   One of the smartest computer folks I know, the man that does his best to fix problems with  Ops Qual for National, is 80 years old.   I would match him against anyone for computer literacy.   Don't discount us "Old Folks"  we can not only learn new tricks, we can still teach them.

[BigMojo]

I choose to remain "somewhat" anonymous, and I have what I view to be a good reason.

I fear if I fully disclosed my information that I would be pre-judged based on what I've read here before I signed up.

That being said, Hi, I'm Ben, a still wet behind the ears SM. Nice to meet you...See, now I'm not anonymous any more.

[Short Field]

[I resent the remarks against the "Old Folks" being computer illiterate.   I am an "Old Folk"  and I have owned a computer since 1980...

    SoCalCAPOfficer, you just made my point.  Notice I said "For example:".  I was just looking for an example that could get a rise out of some folks.  As someone who got to attend training conducted by Admiral Hopper while she was still a Captain, I sort of resemble that remark as well.   

While I don't mind other people on forums getting upset with me, starting flame wars, or whatever, I would sure hate to cause disharmony in the squadron.  Anomymity works just fine to prevent that.

[Nick Critelli]

I am disturbed by what I am reading.   Perceived fear of retaliation while certainly  understandable is not a reason to fail to speak the truth. Anonymity does not protect the just it merely hides the coward and provides shelter for the slanderer.  If one is not willing to be identified with and stand by their opinions  both they and their views are worth nothing. 

Internet defamation is  one of the fastest growing areas of international  tort law.  Careers have been shattered by the virus  spread  by anonymous posters.  Anonymity is no shelter, it is a military pillbox.   Do not  tolerate, encourage or spread its evil.

For those who fear in silence,  have courage.   When good men remain silent, evil triumphs.  Speak the truth and you will be invincible.

[SDF_Specialist]

I am disturbed by what I am reading.   Perceived fear of retaliation while certainly  understandable is not a reason to fail to speak the truth. Anonymity does not protect the just it merely hides the coward and provides shelter for the slanderer.  If one is not willing to be identified with and stand by their opinions  both they and their views are worth nothing. 

Internet defamation is  one of the fastest growing areas of international  tort law.  Careers have been shattered by the virus  spread  by anonymous posters.  Anonymity is no shelter, it is a military pillbox.   Do not  tolerate, encourage or spread its evil.

For those who fear in silence,  have courage.   When good men remain silent, evil triumphs.  Speak the truth and you will be invincible.

Nick, great words. I don't think people are afraid to speak the truth, or what is on their mind. I think people are afraid of the consequences that could result if they do. Anymore, if someone out of anger says "man I'd like to kill him...", it's perceived as a threat. What can we do when everyone seems to take our words, and twist them?

[Nick Critelli]

...afraid to speak the truth, or what is on their mind. I think people are afraid of the consequences that could result if they do.  ****  What can we do when everyone seems to take our words, and twist them?

The ONLY consequence that can come from speaking the truth is good.  One may have to go to the effort of defending  the truth, but it is always  better to fight the good fight than cower in the cellar. 

Of course this presupposes that what one speaks is, in fact the truth and not  opinion or unverified republication.  

What gets most people into trouble (bad consequences from speech) is the tendency to voice their opinion.  There is an old adage in the Law of Evidence: Everyone is entitled to their own opinion which they should more properly keep to themselves.  Many a man has proven himself a fool (even on CapTalk) by voicing an opinion.   Only those opinions which are backed  by experience/training/study are worth stating.  If one has neither, he would be better off keeping quiet and learn from others who do.

Republication presents a totally different type of problem as has been evident by various blogs and postings including some relating to CAP. 

Today, anyone can setup an Internet blog,  filled with news linked from free Internet sources, even join a newspaper trade association  (membership free) and viola claim to be a journalist taking the shelter  of NY Times v Sullivan (immunity from defamation) and privilege from disclosure of sources. In essence, it's  a license to defame and they do a very good job of it.  Rule:  Never trust a republisher (either on a blog or on a post) unless they are willing to disclose their sources or give you the name of their liability insurance carrier. 

Regarding words being twisted, words  are tools of communication.  Chose and use them wisely. Most postings are nothing more than personal streams of  consciousness which are guaranteed to get you into trouble.


NC

[mikeylikey]

I have been away from the board for a few days......I would just like to say that there are people out there that will just as easily put their name to something that is a total fabrication.  Being anonymous or not here is not the question I think we wanted to originally debate.  I think it was more of a way fro those that don't get long with others here to "call them out" on technicalities.  If we don't like what an anonymous poster posts......IGNORE IT!  Suck it up and drive on to something more interesting!!!

[Nick Critelli]

Suck it up and drive on to something more interesting!!!

It's always interesting to have the view from the anonymous side.  Why do you maintain your anonymity?

[Short Field]

The ONLY consequence that can come from speaking the truth is good.  One may have to go to the effort of defending  the truth, but it is always  better to fight the good fight than cower in the cellar. 

I agree with you in matters of fraud, corruption, other criminal behavior, and matters of integrity that speaking the truth is the only way to go.  But the polite lie is the social grease that makes it posssible for us to live with each other.

When the wife asks "Does this make my butt look fat?", quite a few of us had better be looking for a good way to answer, - and the honest truth isn't it.    Pointing out other peoples faults and weaknesses in a public forum is not the way to motivate them to change.  One trait I have seen in good commanders is that they always praise in public and chastize in priivate.  Anonymity on this site helps keep it private.

As for fear of retailiation, well, retailiation is a real threat.  People have to pick their own battles.   Sometimes you and the organization are better off if you keep your mouth shut and wait until you are in a position to constructively change things.  What was that line from Hamlet?  2b or not 2b??? 

Tags - MIKE

[mikeylikey]

Suck it up and drive on to something more interesting!!!

It's always interesting to have the view from the anonymous side.  Why do you maintain your anonymity?

Because I CAN

[Nick Critelli]

Because I CAN

Wrong, my friend. The real question is SHOULD YOU.

Tags - MIKE

[mikeylikey]

^^  Well.....  I don't know you.  How am I to know you are not some super spy from Russia or something.  Just because you type your name, doesn't give you any more standing in my book.  I look at a persons OVERALL posts, the subjects they have brought up, the threads they started and whether they are adding productively to the discussion. 

Anyway, when the rules change and I HAVE to tell you who I am, then I will.

[BillB]

News Of The Farce reports that MikeyLikey is really Tony Pineda with an anonymous name

[flyerthom]

News Of The Farce reports that MikeyLikey is really Tony Pineda with an anonymous name

I thought he was Elvis.

[Al Sayre]

The ONLY consequence that can come from speaking the truth is good.  One may have to go to the effort of defending  the truth, but it is always  better to fight the good fight than cower in the cellar. 

I agree with you in matters of fraud, corruption, other criminal behavior, and matters of integrity that speaking the truth is the only way to go.  But the polite lie is the social grease that makes it posssible for us to live with each other.

When the wife asks "Does this make my butt look fat?", quite a few of us had better be looking for a good way to answer, - and the honest truth isn't it.    Snip
Tags - MIKE

Unless she is standing there starkers you can always answer no and leave it at that...  After all it really isn't the clothes that makes it look fat...

[RiverAux]

There are several different types of anonymous poster:
1.  The guy who signs up and immediately starts picking fights for the fun of it (The Troll).  Nobody likes them, but they are quickly spotted and are usually pounded into submission pretty quickly.  

2.  Part-time trolls.  These folks usually make worthwhile comments but every now and again like to trash people (either on the board or in their unit/Wing) personally.  They obviously want to keep their "freedom" to behave badly on occassion.  

3.  The guy with honestly good intentions who has a problem and is looking for advice on how to solve it, but doesn't want to make his unit look bad by broadcasting its problems to the entire world.  Probably won't stick around long.

4.  Folks who generally make worthwhile contributions to the board but who know CAP well enough to understand that real criticism, even if written in a constructive and nice way, can come back to bite them if their comments got back to their units.


We all know that it is very unlikely that anything really beneficial to CAP will arise from the discussions on this board.  It is a fun activity.  So why undertake it if the only possibility of something real happening is getting kicked out of CAP if someone doesn't like what you say here?  No one is going to get an award for anything they say here, but there is every possibility of getting actual negative results to your CAP career, even if you're one of the "good guys".    

[Nick Critelli]

...We all know that it is very unlikely that anything really beneficial to CAP will arise from the discussions on this board.  It is a fun activity.  So why undertake it if the only possibility of something real happening is getting kicked out of CAP if someone doesn't like what you say here?  No one is going to get an award for anything they say here, but there is every possibility of getting actual negative results to your CAP career, even if you're one of the "good guys".   

I couldn't disagree more. A lot of good comes from CAPTALK postings. We have one thing in common: CAP and we want to make it better. CAPTALK provides us with a a forum where we can share ideas, debate and discuss various issues relating to CAP. 

That's my problem with anonymous posters. They're simply bomb throwers, snipers  who add nothing of value but rancor.

If all you see in this endeavor  is the negative, I feel very sorry for you.  By the way....who  are you anyway.  I've been debating with you for some time on this and other threads and don't have a clue who you are.  Are you a  CAP member?

[mikeylikey]

That's my problem with anonymous posters. They're simply bomb throwers, snipers  who add nothing of value but rancor.

Should I disregard everything you may ever post again because of that comment.  That is not usually the case around here!  I thought I added some value (even if it was conjecture, or humor, or a real honest answere).  But if that is how we are going to play around here.......I will only read posts by those who have posted over 1,000.  Usually by that time the anonymous poster who is here just to cause trouble leaves.  Is that fair, we should only take in to account posts by those that have been here over a year, or have reached 1,000+ Posts.  No, neither is your reasoning!

[floridacyclist]

And then there are those anonymous posters who threaten physical violence to other posters while hiding behind their veil.

[mikeylikey]

^  I only told you what to do to yourself, I never said I WOULD DO IT!

[floridacyclist]

I think the moderators would disagree with that as they read everything you wrote, but that is neither here nor there; I did not point you out as a bomb thrower, you chose to identify yourself. Out.

[MIKE]

Getting too personal.  Lock.