At 10:30 PM 11/14/2001 -0800, Nicholas wrote:
> > Anonymity cuts both ways. It can be great for leveling the playing field.
>But there's also literature to support the view that people rely heavily on
>the source of a piece of information or viewpoint as an indicator of it's
>validity.
>
>Intensely true. Supporting literature is unneeded. This is simply a fact.
"Simply a fact." Wow. Very persuasive! Even makes sense ;o)
> > Denied that indicator, they can feel that the system, full of anonymous
>comments, is too sterile to be useful. Anonymity is a useful tool for
>certain situations ... but I doubt it can be the norm for effective project
>work.
>
>Which is why aliases are so beneficial to the Web. They permit
>freedom of speech, while allowing an anonymous author to develop
>validity through a series of writings. Clearly one cannot contribute
>to core code anonymously. But for debugging, why not?
*Alias* is just another way of remaining anonymous if you choose not to
reveal your identity.
Anybody recall the game Bill Joy played on the readers of Wired?
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html
I won't spill the beans here, but go read it if you haven't already.
Jack
Community email addresses:
Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
Subscribe: unrev-II-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: unrev-II-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: unrev-II-owner@onelist.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/unrev-II
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Nov 15 2001 - 06:27:05 PST