Text 5155, 94 rader
Skriven 2010-02-22 17:45:04 av Lee Lofaso (3:800/432.0)
Ärende: Using An Alias 4
========================
Hello Everybody,

"When thou art at Rome, do as they do at Rome." - Cervantes

I am not aware of ANY publication (or media) where participants
(amateur or professional) are required to expose their true names
against their will.  Except in computer conferencing, such as fido.
Celebrities and movie starts often use "stage names".  Authors
often use "pen names".  So why are fido participants forced to
use their real names when posting messages?  IT MAKES NO SENSE!
Celebrities, movie stars and authors are able to protect their
addresses and phone numbers, thus keeping themselves and their
families free from harm.  But not so for fido participants.

Why does the moderator of this echo insist that all participants,
including sysops and moderators, expose themselves to harm by forcing
everybody to use their real names in posting messages?  Can he give
a sound reason?  To date, he has given no reason at all.  Certainly
he must have a reason.  Or does he?

All media that caters to the general public should allow those who
choose to participate as many opportunities to protect their privacy
as possible.  That includes the use of aliases.  And most media does
in fact grant participants those opportunities.  But not fido.

Television shows have been known to mask voices and faces to protect
the identity of guests.  Audience members who participate are not
required to state their full names before speaking.  Why should fido
be any different?  Can you tell me?  Can the moderator of this echo
tell me?  Can anybody tell me?

Let's take a look at talk radio.  Like this echo, talk radio is a group
discussion and debate medium geared toward controversy.  Emotions run
high.  Sometimes very high.  Especially with personas such as Rush
Limbaugh running the show.  Imagine Rush Limbaugh being the moderator
of Fidonews.  Policy would be that callers (participants) are identified
by their first names (unless some idiot volunteers more).  However,
Rush Limbaugh is not the moderator of Fidonews.  The real moderator
of this echo is far more prejudiced than Rush Limbaugh ever was or
will ever be, always insisting that all participants reveal their
entire real names when posting messages.

I did mention authors having been published under "pen names".  This
has been a tradition ever since the invention of the printing press,
and even before, when man had only papyri and a feather.  Have you
ever read a magazine or a newspaper?  Many of those publications include
a section known as "Letters to the Editor".  Ever read some of those
letters?  Many of those letters end with "name and address withheld by
request" as the signature line.

So what the hell is wrong for participants to use "pen names"?  What
is so evil?  The way I look at it, such use is patriotic, in a very
American sort of way.  Is the moderator of this echo "anti-American"?
If one is aware of American history, that is what one might conclude.
What American patriots have been known to conceal their real names
in publications, you might ask.  Alexander Hamilton, James Madison,
and John Jay.  To name but a few.  These American patriots authored
some of the Federalist Papers in 1787, in the letters column of
various New York City newspapers, all using the pseudonym "Publius".

But let's not call the moderator of this echo "anti-American".
After all, he is a Swede, and cannot be expected to know any better.

What do you think would happen if you called a talk radio host (such
as Rush Limbaugh) and demanded to know the identity of the previous
caller?  Do you think Rush Limbaugh would tell you?  Of course not!
He would call you a liberal socialist pig hell-bent on causing the
destruction of the United States!  Hell, he might even accuse you
of being a terrorist, a member of al-Qaeda, or maybe even of being
Osama bin Laden himself!

That same demand comes up without much challenge in fido.  And that
is a shame.  When a moderator requests a participant to use his/her
real name, that demand should always be looked upon as suspicious.
Every sysop and moderator in fido should take it upon themselves the
responsibility of making sure that EVERY PARTICIPANT has the ABSOLUTE
RIGHT to refuse such intrusive and inappropriate demands.

Privacy policies in traditional media are the result of wisdom gained
from long experience.  Is the moderator of this echo so arrogant to
believe that we (the participants of fido) cannot learn from others?
It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that forcing
participants to reveal their real names is a recipe for disaster.
Will the moderator of this echo wait for disaster to strike, or will
he gain the wisdom others have learned from long experience and put
an end to an outmoded and disastrous policy of real names only?

--Lee


 * SLMR 2.1a * Im he as ur he as ur me n w'r ll 2gtha

--- Maximus 3.01
 * Origin: Xaragmata / Adelaide SA telnet://xaragmata.mooo.com (3:800/432)