anonymity == no big whoop

[dwb]

It seems all message boards are destined to collapse into discussions about themselves, and it's sooo boring because it happens all the time.  Normally, I try to avoid such discussions,  but I'll make an exception here, because I think there is a CAP Core Values tie-in, and I'm always willing to discuss Core Values.

The issue is whether people should "sign" their posts -- to make it known who they are in real life.  The argument is that people will behave better, and that they shouldn't hide behind the quasi-anonymity of the Internet when posting.  Given the sort-of-but-not-really military aspect of CAP, this anonymity allows for junior members to snipe at senior members or CAP's leadership, with no real accountability.

My rebuttal is that anonymity on these (and other) message boards is no big deal.  It just doesn't matter whether someone chooses to identify themselves, for two reasons.

First of all, even without knowing someone's name and CAP grade, you make assumptions about a person from the moment you start reading their posts.  Those assumptions are hard to shake, even if you find out who the person really is.  Once you decide "crzyCAPdood" is an idiot, then learning his name is John Smith and he's a C/Maj isn't going to change your opinion.  You still think he's an idiot, although you now also think he should know better because he's a Phase IV cadet.

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.

You should not be concerned whether crzyCAPdood is disrespectful, but rather, if you yourself are providing the proper respect to other members of the board, regardless if you outrank them or they outrank you or they're really Maj Gen Pineda posting anonymously.  This is especially true when you're arguing with someone who is showing a lack of tact.

People who are willing to be disrespectful anonymously are probably people who are overtly disrespectful in real life.  At least, I've found that correlation to be strong.  Once crzyCAPdood is outed, he'll probably be nice to the superior officers that smacked him down, but he's already been exposed as lacking Respect and Integrity, so you know that behavior will infiltrate other aspects of his life.

In conclusion, I don't think it's useful to remark about anonymity, because you're already making judgements about that person anyway, and I've found that adding their name and rank to the equation doesn't really change those judgements.

The one exception is if someone is posting as the official authority.  For instance, if Suzie Parker were answering uniform questions, I would expect that she make it known who she is, so people know they are receiving official word from an NHQ staffer.

Thoughts?  Flames about the fact that I don't sign my real name? (the admins and long-time CAP Talk members know who I am, I'm not really anonymous)

[pixelwonk]

Well said, General Pineda.

[Major Carrales]

I find that signing my posts is a good way to prevent myself from saying something stupid.  I have never, to my knowledge, said anything that is worthy of a 2B have have tried my best not to be baited into doing so.

I also, sort of make it my unwritten rule to try to return conversations to civility or interject some sort of REALITY check when things fly out beyond "too far."

We throw around so many good ideas from time to time that get nebulized by the atomizer of  vitriol, agendism bias and a host of other negatives.

[MIKE]

I find that signing my posts is a good way to prevent myself from saying something stupid.

Concur, but I also see the benefit of the other side of that and remaining anonymous as means to protect oneself from oneself if you tend to run your mouth a bit. 

There is also the benefit of being able to approach some subjects differently, since your name and or affiliations won't be tied to what you post.

[shorning]

Thoughts?  Flames about the fact that I don't sign my real name? (the admins and long-time CAP Talk members know who I am, I'm not really anonymous)

I think  that's part of the difference.  Not that we really know you, but that you're a contributing member of the community who has built a reputation.  Conversely, the people I take issue with are those who just join in with both guns blazing from the get go.  I find that they generally have an ax to grind or an agenda to push. 

That being said, there are many members here that I don't know who they really are, but they've participated and we've gotten to know them through their posts.  Some I agree with, some I don't, but I'll give them far more credibility that the new person whose first post is mudslinging.  It doesn't fit our core values, and it's not how professionals behave.

[dwb]

Well said, General Pineda.

Thank you, Col Agnello. 

Conversely, the people I take issue with are those who just join in with both guns blazing from the get go.  I find that they generally have an ax to grind or an agenda to push.

Absolutely, and with those people, it doesn't matter whether they're signing their real name, because they've probably already prosecuted the same smear campaign with their local commanders, IGs, the old cap-talk mailing list, CadetStuff, etc.

[Nathan]

Just to provide the devil's advocate argument...

We do expect everyone to use courtesy and respect when dealing with all members, but unfortunately we know it never really happens quite the way it should. Oftentimes, I don't see people posting anonymously for reasons of being able to snipe at others, but rather to avoid being attacked themselves.

For instance, one of the clearer examples I remember (not necessarily from this sit or CadetStuff) is anything having to do with the war in Iraq. Usually, when a real civilian gets involved in such argument, then the military guys come in. Usually, this ends up in a, "Well, I was in the box, and you weren't, so shut your mouth" argument. Then, no matter what the person does, they will be known as the guy or gal who went against the vet in an argument about war politics. Both combatants in the debate may be completely respectful, but regardless, we've all seen similar situations, and that person will have a hard time getting any respect after going toe-to-toe with a soldier, regardless of the validity or position of his or her opinion.

Then there's the well-known members who travel around the forums who are sort of treated like the SpecOps of internet posting. They don't tend to say much, but when they do, they usually end the argument with a single post. Any person who dares stand against one of these members usually isn't attacked back by the member him or herself, but rather by the entire community.

Frankly, given these types of problems, it could be perfectly feasible as to why someone may want to hide their qualifications and/or experiences merely to be able to have some sort of unbiased respect. Perhaps they don't want to be associated with being a civilian simply because they want to be able to have their opinions heard despite their being a civilian, a cadet, or whatever.

My solution to it is that I put my name in my signature, but nothing else. People can recognize me upon meeting me, but they don't know how far I am in CAP, what I've done, or much else unless I tell them. Like the original poster, most people have a pretty good idea of who I am, but regardless, I've found it to be a pretty decent solution. This way, I don't have much of a problem having my opinions be heard by less tolerant members, while still being able to get truthful debate out of those who are subordinate in rank or age to myself.

YMMV

[DNall]

Obviously it's not mandatory, and that's the best policy. However, I think it lends a bit more credibility in that you're putting your name behind it, stand by what you say for better or worse, etc.

Bonus is I've met a whole lot of people of late that've read items I've posted, & mostly agreed. I've also be contacted by email & offline by peole that didn't or couldn't post. It kind of seems like there's an increased synergy about it.

On the other hand, we are all trying to encourage a collegial atmosphere where the new 2Lt or C/MSgt can participate as equals in open discussion with Wg Chiefs of Staff & LtCols w/ 30+ years of service.

I really don't have a problem with the monikers. I prefer if you put your name at the bottom or are open in conversation about who you are. If you choose not to do that, then I personally have nothing against you, but it's going to create an extra hesitance to overcome at times. If I were say a National Board member or assigned to CAP-USAF, then I'm sure I would take advantage of the anonymity. It's your own call though.

[A.Member]

I put in my $.02 about the issue in this thread:
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1147.0

I don't list personal data in on-line forums.  That's my preference.  And I stand by everything I write - the fact that I don't list my name, etc. in a signature line doesn't change that. 

If someone chooses to list their resume with each, that's fine - personally, I could care less.  I don't really pay much attention to them because statements either have merit on their own or they don't.  As a matter of fact, the only need for User Names is for the purpose of directing/responding to a particular comment - whether a User Name is a real name or something else is really irrelevant.

So, I agree - "no big whoop".  It's a non-issue to me.

[RogueLeader]

My op is that I try to be as respectful as due.  I treat them as I would like to be treated.  Some of my posts may cross the line, for which I try to be careful, but there is one reason I don't wan't my name known.  At another site, I got a quasi-dressing down for my opinions about wing.  That was not what should have happened.  There were several other people around-within 4 or 5 feet. I don't want it to happen again.

[floridacyclist]

I agree about the respect part...in fact, the names really shouldn't matter because we should all always treat each other with respect whether we're anonymous or not. I do find it a little uncomfortable talking to an unkown person, like trying to hold a coversation with a masked person.

I do find it interesting that some folks perceive themselves as anonymous even when their name is posted (perhaps it's not real?). I was searching for something on here the other day and found a thread where some cadet airman was ripping a Col a new one, complete with insults. I admit that I have trouble comprehending that anyone with half a lick of common sense can talk to a superior officer like that, then sit back and say "oh well, it's just the internet" and not expect something to happen. They just don't get that rules and regs of common customs and courtesies (as well as common sense) make no distinction as to the communication medium, and that there really is no difference between being disrespectful in person or online.

[bosshawk]

As many of you know, I put both my name and some of my background in my signature block.  As a long time Officer(with a big O), I believe that my word is my bond.  I happened to have been taught that before I was commissioned and it has been my trademark ever since.  I get especially irritated when someone asks me for an ID to pay a bill with a check. 

In these posts, I have never belittled anyone, although I may have violently disagreed with what they have said.  It might be a good lesson for anyone on this blog who fancies themselves as "Officers" to consider adhering to those principles.

I generally say what is on my mind and I mean it: make no mistake about that.  If you don't want folks to know who you are and where you are, you may be avoiding that intellectual honesty that most of us strive to attain.  If these posts are jokes to you, please take them someplace else.

[A.Member]

This forum, and others like it, are public forums - open to anyone.  It is not a requirement to be a CAP member to view or participate in discussions.  If personal attacks are made or conduct is otherwise unacceptable, then that's for the moderators to handle.

[floridacyclist]

That is very true for non-members. For members however, we are still bound by the same rules of conduct on and off-duty and in all social situations. At that point, I think that it becomes a commander's responsibility if they are aware of the member's behavior.

[RogueLeader]

As a CAP Officer,  I do take my posts seriously.  I also want to make known that I stand behind my posts as are.  If there is a NEED to know my name, please ask me in a PM, and I'll be glad to send you my name and rank.  If there is no need for it- let it alone.

[RogueLeader]

Big time bump, it looks like there be some more room room for people to comment and/or review.  I know that my views changed from way back when.

[FW]

The way things can be in CAP; especially with the "Social Media" debate raging with in the National Board, I can see the need for a certain anonymity in posting to Cap Talk.  As long as the Mods enforce the Code of Conduct, I have no problem with contributors speaking their mind without identifying themselves.  We have the freedom of analysing posts as we see fit.  After all, this is a discussion board; not an official policy site of CAP.

[Eclipse]

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

Now, there is a difference between signing your title and staff posting, which can give the impression of some weight behind your statements, and just going by a handle, but in general you are only as anonymous as someone is interested in finding you, especially to other CAP members.

[vmstan]

I look at CAP Talk like a giant (public) Officers Club or a local pub where we'd all hang out (not in uniform ) on a weekend to talk shop. There would be mutual respect among members but it's not formal.

That said, I'm a huge fan of knowing names, squadrons/area and rank of members who post here, if not so much to add more weight to the person's opinion in the discussion but to also "extend my social network" -- Also, you never know when we could end up at a wing/region/national event or even a mission together.

[EMT-83]

I post "anonymously" in the few forums I belong to, in an effort to reduce my presence on the Internet. Doing a Google search on my name produces very few hits, and you need to dig to find them. I happen to like that.

In communications with board members by PM or email, I don't hide who I am. There are squadron members and Wing staff here who know who I am. Being aware of that fact usually keeps me from saying something stupid. Not always, but most of the time.

For those who post their real names, I recognize maybe a half-dozen people. So, no big whoop.