"We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any 'member' name you wish." Around Town, posted by Chris Zaharias, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 10:59 am
PaloAltoOnline.com asks that posters use their real names, which in my opinion means your full, real name (Chris Zaharias, for example, which is mine); after all, using your real first name along is no less anonymous than using a 'member name'.
I imagine the editor(s) feel that posting with our real names ensure
a) that postings are respectful & truthful; and
b) that Town Square continues to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing *community* information & opinion.
I do think respectful & truthful discussion are enhanced when what we say is attached to who we are, and it's without question that the only way to ensure opinions being posted are *from* community members is for people to state their true name (or at least affirm their PA residency).
Can the editor(s) clarify their desires on this point, and can readers agree or disagree with my views? I love PAOnline and would love it even more if it had the true, PA local community feel to it that real names would afford.
Posted by Moose of the anony kind, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:12 am
Chris: Privacy is important. In an extreme example, anonymity protects whistleblowers.
While we see few true whisltleblower posts here, there are times when I post thoughts or info that I prefer my employer, for instance, not associate directly with me. Or s/he prefers not to have associated with him/her.
Posted by Chris Zaharias, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:29 am
I hear you, Moose. FWIW, I *want* to be fired (or not hired) by any employer who objects to my stated views. It's already happened at least once, and I consider myself better off career-wise for it. Can't imagine having worked for a company who wouldn't want me speaking my mind on topics related to the place I live.
Posted by Palo Parent, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:40 am
Um Chris, while us anonymous posters surely would prefer to promote your desire to: "love it even more", some of us us are sole family supporters in a 10% unemployment state and our desire to not do anything that might draw fire on-line surely trumps your desires.
Posted by Chris Zaharias, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:42 am Chris Zaharias is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
Posted by agree with intolerance, a resident of another community, on Dec 26, 2012 at 11:52 am
Of course the Weekly wants to know who you are, especially if you disagree with them or criticize their reporting etc.
If the weekly is interested in knowing everyone's name, they should make it a requirement to post--of course then nobody would be posting. Their ad revenue would dry up, since no one was on their page.
However, I make it a point NOT to do business with anyone that advertises on the weekly site.
Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 12:10 pm
I would like to stay anonymous for various reasons, but not because I want to be disrespectful or untruthful. It doesn't follow that someone who is using their real name will be any more truthful than someone who is anonymous and respectfully how do I know that you are in fact Chris Zaharias and not someone else using your name.
I use facebook and comment on a lot of the news fb pages like many ther people, and all those news articles are commented on by a great many people all presumably using their real names but are very disrespectful and use foul language. Unfortunately, I don't think people who want to be disrespectful will change very much even if they were forced to use their real names.
Posted by Craig Laughton, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 1:26 pm
If forced to use real names, this forum would dry up. One tweak I would suggest is that the Weekly modify its forced registration cap on various topics...it could just insist that real names by used in order to continue (or be a registered user).
Posted by Abraham Lincoln ;-0, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 2:07 pm
Using "real names" - whether registered or not - has its own set of problems. Would the Weekly verify that a poster is who s/he says? How? What would prevent "identity-jacking"?
To me the best policy seems to be to try to be civil and encourage it in others, while continuing to edit out those who are really over the line.
Posted by homeless, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 4:35 pm
I agree with the post. Reason I don't use my real name is that trust is gone.I do trust Palo Alto on line staff though, for not posting people's names unless its agreed to.
Posted by Craig Laughton, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 5:19 pm
>Would the Weekly verify that a poster is who s/he says? How? What would prevent "identity-jacking"?
An identity jacker would be protested by the real deal person. There is no perfect system, but I think my idea is a good one. Too many threads are shut down by the artificial cap that is currently employed by the Weekly.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 5:44 pm
I used my real name and location up until a few months ago. The reason I stopped is that someone figured out who my husband and I were and exactly where we lived. Then they vandalized some of our property, and harassed us by mail, mocking us with the online names of everyone in the family. No more.
Posted by Craig Laughton, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:00 pm
>"An identity jacker would be protested by the real deal person."
"Posted by Abraham Lincoln"
Has the real Abe spoke up yet?
Uh Moose, that was not Abe, it was me: Craig Laughton (College Terrace).
I don't intimidate well, so I could care less what people think about me. However, many people are intimidated, and they need the cover of annonymity. I support them, if they need it. Especially you, Moose.
Posted by Pro forma, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 6:59 pm
There are many good reasons to allow people privacy on this board, as anonymous pointed out. As for the name validation: there is someone who writes inflammatory posts using my relatively uncommon first name. I don't think s/he is trying to impersonate me, but maybe that's also his/her name, or maybe it just seemed like a reasonable nom de plume. Consequently, I have been criticized me for posts written by my doppelganger.
The more anonymous the better. If PAO wants to keep us to one handle, that's a different story.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 8:08 pm
Recently, I received a Christmas card addressed to my real name that had no return address. Inside, it listed my PAO password, online name, previous online name, and the online names of my son and his wife. Had to turn it over to the police, who think it is someone who has harassed others on PAO. Two days later, my front yard was vandalized. The police came and took a report. If I am harassed any more by this person, the police will contact her and possibly arrest her for stalking.
Posted by Many questions, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 8:27 pm
How did the person get your password? What did the card say? How do you know that the person who sent the card vandalized you yard? I am surprised that the police got involved. Where there threats in the card? Does the police monitor PAO? Is replying to posts considered stalking?
Posted by Not me anymore, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 26, 2012 at 9:57 pm
Not me. Not too long ago there were posts on PAO by a former employee that worked for the city. Clearly he had anger issues. Eventually the city had to go after him for threats he was making. He also went after posters here that disagreed with his claims of mistreatment by the city. Not clear that if he had names that he would not have gone after people by calling or visiting them. Anonymous has value.
Way back when when much like you I requested PAO do more than they do in terms of controlling the tone of the dialogue by having registered posters. A former employee insisted he wanted PAO to be like "the well", an old BBS that has gone the way of the Dodo bird. Apparently he was nostalgic for Internets "golden years" when self policing worked better because the community size was much smaller. Anyway I figure this is PAO's sandbox and this is what they prefer or they would fix it.
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 27, 2012 at 4:51 am
Obviously, I support Anonymous posting.
It would not be a bad idea to have anyone who wants to post register but not have to use their real name in case of problems, in fact I think for legal reasons they ought to forbid use of real names, after all there is a legal consequence to posting certain things as has been mentioned and if the post is not from the claimed identity there could be very negative consequences.
I think it would make people more cautious and polite - maybe, but surely it could endanger or cause people problems problems. I look at message boards as similar to town hall meetings, i.e. at least, in part, political, and as such it is more valuable anonymous along the lines of the secret ballot.
Posted by common sense, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Dec 27, 2012 at 9:16 am
One reason to remain anonymous - there are some who can't handle disagreement or differing viewpoints - and they use personal attacks (instead of arguing the issue).
Beside the "Report Objectionable Content" on each post, the website should also have a "like" "dislike" and compute a popularity count for posts.
Posted by follow the money, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 27, 2012 at 11:26 am
Chris, the forums are here to make PAWeekly money through web page hits and ads. It's as simple as that. As has been repeatedly stated on many free aspects of the web: "If you are getting a product for free, you are the product".
As soon as PAWeekly slap on "registered users only" to a post, it dies. They don't want that and neither, I suspect, do you.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 27, 2012 at 1:12 pm
Many Questions: you ask too many. Suffice it to say that the police took some evidence, and agreed that I am being harrassed. Because of who my husband is, kidnap of my toddler grandchild is always considered a possibility. We have been instructed that if there are any more online or offline incidents, we are to call police immediately.
BTW, the police recommend that EVERYONE use "anonymous" or an ever-changing name and NEVER use your real location.
also, Many Questions: never make joking references to someone's crippling and eventually fatal disease!
Posted by Chris Zaharias, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 27, 2012 at 1:51 pm
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
Police advice be damned for me, though - if I have to live my online life anonymously, I'd just assume not use the Internet. When the telegraph was first widely adopted, people around the world thought it heralded the end of war and a gigantic, permanent elevation of humankind's empathy. They were wrong, but I do still think that the process of learning to behave humanely online as well as off is part of the opportunity of the Internet.
Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 27, 2012 at 6:59 pm
Peter Cao Ming is presumably using his real name and is also a registered user. It does not stop him from being deleted or from posting long uninteresting posts which make no sense and nobody reads.
Anyone can post thoughtful, interesting, respectful posts regardless of whether they are using a real name or are a registered user. It is down to a poster's manners and etiquette as to how they post, not whether they are known or not.
Posted by Hmmm, a resident of East Palo Alto, on Dec 27, 2012 at 10:19 pm
The Anonymous who's been harassed delivers the best case for it not being necessary to use real names here. Follow the Money also makes an excellent point.
I've never understand people *insisting* on posters using their real names. It's silly, stupid & clearly, unsafe for many to do so. Those who want to, please do & I wish you the best in staying safe. Those of us who don't want to have good reasons not to, & many of us are regulars who do real work, both as professionals & the volunteers, in the community. I also sometimes experience a fundamental split between my affiliations w/Stanford & E. Palo Alto. I won't risk my privacy to either using my real name, nor would I want it to effect mine or my spouse's career.
I am happy to know who people who post under their real names are - Chris Zaharias, Peter Carpenter & Michael Stogner, for example. If I met them at some point, I might actually reveal my handle to them. But when I think of our evil landlord, I am SOOO glad that we can be both known & anon here.
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 28, 2012 at 1:07 pm
Apologies to Many Questions:you asked so many questions, I thought you were the perp. Police said watch out for people online who ask too many personal ?s.
Posted by Doyle, a resident of another community, on Dec 28, 2012 at 1:56 pm
"you asked so many questions, I thought you were the perp"
What????????
Somehow doesn't mesh with the previous statements: "I received a Christmas card addressed to my real name that had no return address. Inside, it listed my PAO password, online name, previous online name, and the online names of my son and his wife." That sounds like your computer was hacked.
Why would the so-called perp still troll for info here after already having access to your computers for so long? Sorry, doesn't fly.
-----
btw: great line from 'goose boy'. I got the ref. I think. Reference to the duc###### posts from awhile ago, or to online drama queens sharing inane stories about themselves?
Posted by firewall???, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Dec 30, 2012 at 2:08 pm
If the PAO got hacked weeks ago and they do not know it yet, then that is another reason not to register. I thought that PAO had a firewall or something in place and would detect hacking fairly quickly.
Posted by firewall???, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Dec 30, 2012 at 2:08 pm
If the PAO got hacked weeks ago and they do not know it yet, then that is another reason not to register. I thought that PAO had a firewall or something in place and would detect hacking fairly quickly.
Posted by Let's have the truth, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jan 2, 2013 at 11:29 am
I was out of town for the holidays and did not see this thread until now.
Anonymous---why are you providing misleading information. I sent you the holiday card. There was no password information in it--just best wishes for the holidays to you and your alter egos.
That, of course calls into question the rest of your claims:
-vandalizing of your front yard
-claims of police involvement and what they supposedly said
-claims that PAO has been hacked
--ridiculous claims of the potential kidnapping of your granddaughter
--and other claims
Having read your many posts, I noticed a need for you to over exagerate claims and make up stories and incidents.
It is too bad you have chosen to done it again--in what IMHO is a clear attempt to stifle responses to some of your more outrageous comments.
View in an RSS Reader
E-mail this topic.
Print this topic.
