Pseudonymity, Anonymity, and Accountability Online

[Bruh]

My view on the subject is relatively easy to assess... 

And I gotta hand it to ya Mr. Brennan! Being a pastor and an IFB pastor at that....you already know what that means by being on here. I've come to respect you for this....

 

[FSSL]

So.....

When all is silent in the IFB world and no pastors are on trial, the majority of members on this forum begin to attack each other with no one else to mock.

Interesting thought...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Just John]

I'm really "John Brown" if that helps anyone.  ;D

 

[Just John]

I'm really "John Brown" if that helps anyone.  ;D

my middle name contains all the letters needed to spell my first name.... ... without using any of them twice.... .. .... and my last name is now hyphenated with hispanic names on both sides of the hyphen.....  8) ........ but no.... i didn;t get married...... dinosaurs will return and rule the earth again before that happens..... 

Still holding out on that huh?

Many would have been wiser to do the same.

 

[aleshanee]

So.....

When all is silent in the IFB world and no pastors are on trial, the majority of members on this forum begin to attack each other with no one else to mock.

don;t you have some minorities to go mock in the hacker forum?......  ???


oh wait....  .. my mistake... :-[..... . you weren;t one of the ones there that was doing that......  :-X ...... my apologies sir ....... please do continue on the high road...... 

 

[sword]

Maybe I look at it very differently than others on this forum but I thought the strength of the forum was its anonymity. I am a member of a number of forums. Some work related, some ministry related and at least 2 that are hobby related.

I post with my name in an official capacity on several forums and that brings credibility to my comments.  My criticisms are often posted in anonymity when I see areas of my industry that need corrected or where ethics are being stretched. Others in our community will agree and sometimes things tighten up. Posting with my name in these cases could bring an end to my career yet everyone applauds when things improve as a result of the dialog. 
The same is true of those within ministries that need reformed. Most of us are in churches we feel are closest to our beliefs yet we may see areas that are outdated or plain-out wrong. The open dialog that forums provide can lead to real change. If you don't think the opinion makers & leaders of the IFB read here then you have not spoken with them. You have not heard their comments during sermons;  you have not seen some of the slow but real change that has happened. The younger the leader the faster they are trying to adapt. I am not talking about long held IFB standards as much as methods. If you don't like the standards there are plenty of other "groups" with varying standards to join. The IFB, just like my work community, resists change. Because of this tendency it can be very difficult to express a differing opinion.

I respect Tom B. greatly and enjoy his books but I suspect if he was on staff for someone else?s ministry it would be more difficult to state his views, if they did not match the bosses. Nice thing about being independent you answer only to God and your membership.

I vote for no change. I trust the moderator / admin to police where needed and I would even agree to a membership vote on permanent bans. I think a little more civility is in order and I would like to see less vulgarity even if it?s just suggestive. Never limit ideas but limit how it can be expressed. I think Ransom, as a leader here, could lead the way in this regard.  Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[FSSL]

Anonymity will be kept. I don't want my clients Googling my name and finding me discussing some of the craziness on the FFF or any other Christian forum.

A poll for banning crossed my mind. However, voting does not go well in a divided community such as ours.

A person will be banned. Some right away. Others with a bit more patience.

 

[lnf]

Anonymity will be kept. I don't want my clients Googling my name and finding me discussing some of the craziness on the FFF or any other Christian forum.

A poll for banning crossed my mind. However, voting does not go well in a divided community such as ours.

A person will be banned. Some right away. Others with a bit more patience.

I see wisdom in not doing a ?ban? poll.  Sometimes, polls of that nature turn out to be nothing more than popularity contests.  Frankly, I have thought more than once, ?that person should be banned?, but truth be told, I?m not sure I should be able to wield that sort of power here. 

My reasoning:  certain posting styles ?peeve? me.  For example, when I make a post (which, admittedly, isn?t all that often), I try to outline my line of reasoning in one post.  I don?t care for cryptic or partial answers.  Just spit it out!  So if one of the posters who tend to do that were ?offered up? for banning, I can?t say for sure that my vote would only be based on the ?bannable? offense, without any consideration of my subjective feelings. 

In a trial by jury, the lawyers try to weed out those potential jurors who might have a prior bias and will not be able to judge the defendant solely on the facts of the case at hand.  What I am trying to convey is that a ?ban? poll would not offer that same sort of protection to the ?defendant?.  That would not be fair and I don?t think that this forum should go in that direction. 

I recognize that not having a poll is similar to a non-jury trial, in that the judge (admin) has the sole vote.  Yes, that scenario also has a great potential for abuse.  Mr. Admin, you have a grave responsibility. From what I have seen, though, you do seem to err on the side of caution, in that you have ?suspended? accounts for a time, but have not, to my knowledge, actually permanently banned any users. 

I?m not sure of how we should move forward.  My personal preference is that we would each examine ourselves and self-edit our posts, whether we have a propensity to make ad hominem attacks, be excessively argumentative or provocative, or whatever?we are (mostly) all adults here.  We should act like it!

Furthermore, I, personally, do not use the ?ignore? function.  I can do that all by myself, by using the scroll function.  If I don?t want to read drivel, I just scroll past it. 

 

[FSSL]

Great post!

I have banned Biker. That is the only one I can think of. 2 years ago, he had a tiff and I sent a PM telling him to let it go. He took his own hiatus. He showed up again and did stupid stuff again. I sent him another PM. He took another hiatus. Neither time did he respond to my PMs. He came back and started again... I banned him. I was disgusted by his posts and how he treated others. He didn't have the courtesy to reply to my PMs.



3 years ago we had spammers drop nudes on the forum. They were banned right away.

 

[lnf]

Great post!

I have banned Biker. That is the only one I can think of. 2 years ago, he had a tiff and I sent a PM telling him to let it go. He took his own hiatus. He showed up again and did stupid stuff again. I sent him another PM. He took another hiatus. Neither time did he respond to my PMs. He came back and started again... I banned him. I was disgusted by his posts and how he treated others. He didn't have the courtesy to reply to my PMs.



3 years ago we had spammers drop nudes on the forum. They were banned right away.

Either I had forgotten about Biker or you were quiet about it.  No matter.  I can see why you did ban him, and I am glad of it.  No more needs to be said.  Spammers don't count in what I posted.  That's a different issue altogether.  I imagine we all appreciate how quickly you get rid of spammers!

 

[Just John]

I can certainly understand a need for pseudonymous. With a name as common as my name is  it really doesn't matter for the most part but I have, without disclosing confidential information, carefully shared my thoughts or opinions on some ministries here who were also client accounts I managed.  I could never do so under my name.