RAllen, Just to clarify a few points. I think you took this out of context. The person asking for the credit advice is not decieving anyone just because he doesn't disclose his real name. Would you rather have Ferrari3783 ask about reparing his credit in a public forum, or have Joe Kaplowski Jr stay mute because of shame? Maybe Joe feels it's a little easier to talk about sensitive topics under a username and not his real name? Likewise, the forum might be about health. Maybe the person has a STD or cancer, and would like to talk about it without the world knowing his/her identity and disease. There is no deception. It is just a person looking for information. Would you prefer Ferrari3783 to find support, or to have Joe Kaplowski Jr stay mute out of shame? What is worse, if the real name was attached to every post, would poor old Joe want his future employers to read about his medical questions? There are laws which make it illegal for employers to ask applicants about marital status, children, and so on. But it could all be so easy to find on-line if people post it. Maybe Joe wants to ask if he should quit his $70,000 a year job and move 1000 miles away to a $80,000 job. What would happen if Joes employer was a member at that forum? Maybe Joe won't move, but wants to know his options. Should Joe be empowered to know and feel free to ask? My point is there are many valid reasons for wanting to have anonymity. It depends on the job. But I see a trend where employers demand this information regardless of the position. Would you pass on hiring a gifted mechanic if you knew he had poor credit? Should a restaurant pass on hiring a server because of a criminal record? Should the applicant have any privacy? Lets take this one step further. Should insurance companies be allowed to take blood samples to determine an individuals risk for some cancers, and then disqualify some people from coverage because the risk is too high? This is the internet. There is no proof that anything is true. I'm sure some people come here to live a fantasy second life. If you believe the Lambo owning real estate developer in your on-line chat, then it's a risk you take. Even if you know a persons name, that won't stop the BS. Everyone knows who Carlton Sheets is. That does not stop him from peddling his crap. I don't think knowing someones name would have changed things that much. When you are in your car, people can see your face. They can write down your license plate if they wish. Does that stop you from cutting off a slow driver? I'll admit, I was baited into that argument. The moron who attacked me got his giggles in watching me get pissed off for a moment. Would DrStrangelove have been more civil if his real name was posted? I doubt it. I believe that anonymity on the internet will be lost. Advertisers will start demanding better profiles of memberlists. Many forums now require a real first name, last name, and location. Many forums no longer allow hotmail or yahoo email, they want your ISP email. I do not believe this change will happen to make the internet more civil, but because forum owners will see greater profits if they can prove 1000 real people, rather than 1000 usernames. Is this good for the internet? Television programs rely on demographics for advertising revenue. Unfortunately, advertisers want to spend money on younger viewers. Shows are dumbed down for consumption by younger viewers. Maybe the internet is destined for the same fate.
Sorry, I don't see how I did so. I pointed out how the person in question could and *most likely (YMMV)* would use such a forum: In order to hide info from (as you put it "employers" and etc) those who ned it and have a right to it! Agreed w/reservations. ;-) I'd rather they behave honorably man and admit their mistakes. The recovery process *must* include public acknowledgment of error. Of course. He's a deadbeat (implied) and would like to hide that fact. ZR1 you chose a poor example. Although we may feel sympathetic towards those w/credit probs. Actively hiding credit info from employers, etc, is not excusable. Your example in fact only points out the strengths in my arguments. E.g. those who benefit most from aliases (and re) are those who seek to deceive for dishonorable reasons. Once again you give us an example that is out of context. Health info, like credit info, is not generally considered "public domain." But as w/your credit example I shall play along because I like a challenge and am enjoying chatting w/u. Once again I agree that one in such an unfortunate position would naturally wish to conceal such info. But the "world" does have a right to know. The person in question may suffer from it becoming pulic knowledge but the world at large will be protected. Ies, sexual partners, employers, etc. In BOTH examples the mere act of using an alias is not deception in and of itself. Unfortunately the examples you've given are likely (in the vast majority of cases) to use and alias in order to deceive. As you strongly implied by mentioning "employers." Intent ZR1, intent! Since we do not know the person's intentions and we do know that persons w/STDs, etc, are a menace to public health .... for our own protection we must assume that we are at risk from those who would conceal such info. Asked and answered. You keep mentioning employers. A serious error but one you cannot avoid. Because if you hadn't mentioned it .... ;-) Employers should have the right to know an employees medical status. E.g. I want my driver to be in good health. Otherwise he puts me at risk. <shrug> And again, by *your own* admission .... you mention info not generally considered public domain. BTW: There are many laws which should be repealed. Please try again ZR1. ;-) Ok .... i'll play. An employer would find it ridiculously simple to find out an applicant's marital status, etc. Having the employee disclose such info only saves the employer some time and money. And it's info the employer needs and should have the right to ask. If the employee refuses .... no prob. No job! Side Issue: As an honest, law abiding, tax paying employer why should I be FORCED to hire persons who may not be to my liking (Assuming i'm not in civil service and re.)? ZR1 this is becoming a bit tedious. But I shall keep playing. <chuckle> Why should his employer be denied such info? I dunno. Would he give Joe a raise? <mo chuckles> Joe's not being denied access to info. If Joe's intenttions are honorable he should not fear disclosure. But if Joe is out to screw his employer then I can understand why Joe wouldn't feel free to post his Qs. A point I agreed w/in my reply to ferrari355f1 (post #82). Agreed. Perhaps. The other side of the coin is that as an employer I want to know *everything* about those I hire. Everything! Since i'm not initiating force, only *asking* for said info, i'm not behaving in an immoral/unethical manner. It's Joe's choice to decide if he shall disclose or not. Or lie? <chuckle> Hmmm, tough one. I probably would pass. I'd want a gifted mechanic w/good credit. But unless I had access to credit info i'd be engaging in a crap shoot, wouldn't I? Why shouldn't I have a right to know Joe's credit history? Hiring Joe isn't only decided by Joe's job skills ZR1. Iwant to know if i'm hiring a mechanic who *I* feel can be trusted. Depends. Usually the answer shold be .... Yes, pass! Sure thing. Oh noes .... more digression. <lol> Yes. Assuming that insurance companies should not have undue Gubmint protections (as they do now). I ask you (as i have in your other examples): Why should an insurance provider be denied such info? Sounds like ferrrari355f1's argument. Ie; It's not real. A poor argument given the context of this discussion. My reply: Get Real! The fact is that under our present system we must put undue trust in our forum members. And often suffer needlessly for it. Ironic isn't it? As I pointed to to ferrari355f1 .... his mistrust is partially based on the fact that the Net is "virtual reality." IOW; Unreal! <chuckle> But he argues FOR anonymity because he doesn't trust us! Asked and answered. Please see my first post. A fool and his money are soon parted. Due diligence my friend ZR1. We can't stop scammers but we can make life more difficult for them thereby reducing our overall risk. Wrong scenario for this discussion. But the answer is soo simple .... write down the license plate number. Make notes of the person's appearance, time of day, location, etc. And sue the bugger or file a complaint, etc. Ridiculous? Perhaps, but the point is that one has *recourse*. And if it was common knowledge that penalties might ensue, (iow; that it'd be relatively easy to punish the miscreant) it would deter those who might otherwise misbehave. Why do you think we have traffic laws? Dop people obey them always, to the letter? <lol> And if we had none? Not really. Some were unkind. Possibly due to holiday angst. Doodoo occurs. <shrug> Bad move ZR1. And unecessary. And unjustified. I believe an apology's required here. Perhaps. I think both of you overreacted. But you went WAAAY overboard. Relax .... he's a nice guy. But we all overreact from time to time. Don't you think that i've embarrassed myself on the Net? We all have bad days from time to time. The following's not directed at any one person: If your ego can't handle it you should seek other venues. But it's so much simpler to just rejoin under another alias, right? And you'll never learn how to deal w/the usual Net misunderstandings. <sigh> I don't doubt it. Because that's exactly how it worked in the past. It's about establishing an air of accountability. Anonymity only empowers those who would do us harm. Remove the masks. Make it very difficult for someone who has deveoped a poor rep to rejoin under another name and you will deter the *true* "morons." Hurrah! What's the prob? I don't see it. <shrug> Hurrah! That's how I ran mine. It worked VERY well! Perhaps that may be because you weren't around in the days of BBS' and 1200 baud modems. <chcukle> Hurrah! Yes! Long live capitalism (not to be confused with imperialism <W>). So severely flawed a reply is unecessary. So severely flawed a reply is unecessary. Ok, i'll reply .... <sigh> .... this is F-Chat. I seriously doubt that our sponsors are interested in selling Ferrari parts to fifteen yr olds. Get the point? Richard.
In reference to Rob's reference to me early on, I told him F-Chat was up, I typed in my sign-in info, and as soon as I hit enter, F-Chat immediately crashed. And as far as all the other crap that has been posted on this thread, a lot of you just need to grow up, think about what you are posting, or quoting, and think twice or thrice before posting ANYTHING. Just ask yourself if what you are saying has any real value in this forum/situation, and if not, don't hit 'submit reply'. There are a lot of times I type crap in, then I look at it, and I say 'It's not worth it', and I just X out of it. More of you need to do the same, and if you don't, then this will become a carbon-copy of a Yahoo chat room real quick. Stop finger-pointing and just DROP IT. PLEASE.
