Petition to Remove the Anonymous Poster Function All Together

A possible intermediate solution would be to require all original questions/discussions to be from identified persons. That would have prevented the recent dopey troublemaker.

There are still some valid, but not overwhelming, reasons for occasional anonymity.

Fully agree on this one!

It doesn't bother me that someone wants to be anonymous.

I don't see the problem. Leave it as is.

"...generally just used for childish behavior, trolling purposes, or cowardly attacks towards others without the perpetrator needing to fess up to whom he/she really is..."

No, not usually as far as I've seen.

Even when it does happen, so what? What are you going to do, require eveyone to use their real name? And a real photo?

"Even when it does happen, so what? What are you going to do, require eveyone to use their real name? And a real photo?"

Huh? That just sounds argumentative and dumb.

What I am talking about is just not having an anonymous poster function any longer. That's it. All it would means is no one can post anonymously and nothing more. Anything that you post shows up as a normal regular post does now with your forum name and what not attached to it so that everyone knows who you are.

Whats so hard about understanding that? Do you spend much time trolling other members threads and posts as an anonymous poster and need to keep under cover?

You should have posted that anonymously.

Who are you to talk?

I never post anonymously and I never will.

What ever I have to say good or bad gets my name attached to its so everyone can see exactly who it's coming from.

I have nothing to hide and no reasons to hide over what I have to say about or to anyone over anything.

"The problem is their is no way (AFAIK) to screen out 'sock puppets' - a 2nd internet persona a person uses to attack/support a given position. So you ban anonymous posters -- and the person establishes a 2nd avatar and posts their statements anyway. So what's the point?"

Rule #1 in the CR4 Rules of Conduct section.

"1. Each user is allowed to create one account. One person, one user profile. No exceptions."

"I've spent way too much time here on this, but I thought you deserved a full answer because I've enjoyed a lot of your comments in the past. I guess it's too bad if you think my opinion on this is dumb, but it is what it is. That's my opinion and I'm stickin' to it."

I am not asking for everyone to use their actual names or anything like that. All I am asking about is how many other people do not like the anonymous poster function and would like it removed like the guest function was done away with some time ago.

The part I found dumb about your reply is that you apparently were reading right past what I posted and taking it completely off the topic and out of the context of the thread entirely.

I doubt that Rule 1 is enforceable, because some violations are undetectable, I suspect.

"Even when it does happen, so what? What are you going to do, require eveyone to use their real name? And a real photo?" (Usbport)

Huh? That just sounds argumentative and dumb. (tcmtech)

That sounds like LinkedIn. Any thoughts on that format?

I've never been a fan of anonymous posters, formerly known as Guest.

If I had a choice, which I don't, I'd only let them observe, but we don't make the rules.

I thought about posting anonymously.

Now, you'd think anyone making such a request would at least use a recent photo of themselves as their avatar and use their real name, no?

I have made a similar suggestion in the past. It generated a substantial amount of dialog on the issue at the time.

IMHO... putting a name behind a post, even if a made up screen name, allows a contributor to build a reputation that allows other users to decide if input from that individual is of any value or not.

To my mind, no matter how frivolous at times it can become, inherently these discussions are of a serious nature, or should be, and as such, the contributions to them need to be serious. It is rather hard to consider anything as being serious from a person not willing to claim their positions.

I support this idea...

North of 60...

AKA... Rick Kelly

The only real problem I have is that sometimes the original poster will respond as a guest making things more confusing, or differentiating between guests on the same thread.

Is this anonymous poster function really a problem? I seem to remember in previous discussions on the subject CR4 moderators had good reasons to have the function.

I don't mind either way.

I like the AP function, even though I don't use it.

That little episode with the stoner machine operators was the funniest thing I've read on here in a while. The more I read the responses the more I laughed out loud.

Any one who took that post seriously may be a little embarrassed, but it might serve them to stay sharp when responding to future "outlandish" questions.

This would have not been possible without AP status (unless Mr. AP didn't mind hurting some feelings).

No...that would be like eliminating the 6th dimension.

I'll vote for your petition, if you vote for mine. But things would be boring. And by the way nobody is anonymous to the moderators, you can't post at all anonymous or not, if you are not logged in, and that's the way it should be.