New one for the FAQ

[Antigen]

Maybe I should reword my terms of use to better represent what these fora have become. So I'm asking for your help in doing this. Please tell me, in 3 pages or less, what these fora are for.

Oh, and BTW, I have made 1.5 decisions. I don't care what anyone says, I'm changing the name to "Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora". I have found that Fora is the actual, accepted (though charmingly arcane) plural form of the word "forum" and I just like the sound of it. So there!  

And I may well limit anon postings to a few forums. I really, really don't want to shut out all those folks who have become regular or occasional posters and who would never have posted at all if they had had to register first. Anyone have any thoughts on that one?

Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked,  and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that  the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque  self-deception."  
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0517150735/circlofmiamithem' target='_new'>Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger, 1916, Ch.9

[RTP2003]

I think anon posts are OK.  Some people might not feel comfortable posting and having their name (even a nick)attached to it.  We could lose some very good insights if anon posting were discontinued.  If anon posting bothers you, don't read anon posts. Simple as that.  Maybe you could include a "anon post filter switch" that would give the subject line but not the post if the switch is turned on.

[Froderik]

I would really like to say BAN ANONS, b/c it gets so damned confusing and irritating sometimes, but I doubt that it would be a solution to anything. We'd probably just see an increase of registered user names appropriated for the moment. Or maybe not...

I like the filter switch idea of RTP's, but I wonder if such a feature even exists.

IMO, If people want to post anon, they should AT LEAST sign some initials, even if it's not their REAL initials, just some kind of tag to cut down on the confusion factor.

I don't know Ginger, when all is said and done I guess it's your board, and you'll do what you want with it. It's thoughtful of you to ask for some input on the matter, but this is the best I can do...

[Antigen]

Frod
I like the filter switch idea of RTP's, but I wonder if such a feature even exists.

U kiddin', man? Of cours I could do that. It's just software, after all. You define the rules and the machine follows them precisely.

But I don't know of a way to eliminate completely ppl accidentally posting anon. I do it sometimes. Only difference is that I can go into the database and change the userid from Anonymous to mine. So, unless you see it happen, you wouldn't bust me at it. And I remember what happens in Usenet and IRC when people use killfiles and /ignore features. It's like a group conversation  where some of the conversants are on the phone. Nobody knows who's saying what to whom and the whole conversation just gets that much more nonsensical.

Then there's the Fornits policy and theory on website development. "I draw my idea of the form of [web site design] from a principle in nature, which no art can overturn, viz., that the more simple any thing is, the less liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered; and with this maxim in view, I offer a few remarks on the so much boasted [advances in web page design]." - Thomas Paine paraphrased.

A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another; shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement
http://laissezfairebooks.com/product.cfm?op=view&pid=FF7485&aid=10247' target='_new'>Thomas Jefferson  

[Froderik]

With all due respect to my fav code chick, that DOES seem a bit sophisticated...being able to create a filter as was described to make anon posts viewable by choice like that...I suppose you'd have to create some sort of script...but hell, if you can do it, that might be really cool. That way, anon posts would be discouraged, but not prohibited. I'd be curious as to just how you would make such a thing possible... :em:

[RTP2003]

Anonymous posts could be listed as a single line subject and subtopic, the entire post activated by clicking on it.  Or, with filter off, the posts would be seen as they are now.  I'm not a techie, just an annoying end-user that can tell you what I want, but not how to do it.

[Antigen]

Well, either one could be done. In fact, I could do all kinds of nasty things to Anon. I could give Anon even goofier avatars; run a switch filter, like for example changing all instances of " I " to " I, the all powerful maker of the universe. "

But it would take considerable effort and might not have the intended effect after all.

I'll have to think on it some more...

For something that has spread with all the forethought of kudzu, the Internet isn't half bad."
-- Newsweek, 2/27/95

[Anonymous]

Maybe I should reword my terms of use to better represent what these fora have become. So I'm asking for your help in doing this. Please tell me, in 3 pages or less, what these fora are for.

The Teen Help Industry
A general discussion of abusive 'therapy', especially abusive adolescent therapy.

Straight, Inc Survivors
Survivors of Straight, Inc. only

VisionQuest
This one is dead.  Move the threads to Teen Help.

I have no particular views on the rest.

And I may well limit anon postings to a few forums. I really, really don't want to shut out all those folks who have become regular or occasional posters and who would never have posted at all if they had had to register first. Anyone have any thoughts on that one?

I am a bit dubious about Anon filters because the rest of the thread would probably not make sense with the anons removed/collapsed so you would end up reading them anyway.  What would be really useful would be a way of telling them apart (Anon 1, Anon 2, etc).  IP address is not a universal answer because we do not all have static addresses but perhaps you could insist Anon posters accept cookies so you can track which one they are.  This would not solve the problem of the maliciously anonymous but my feeling is that, most of the time, anonymous posters just cannot be bothered to set up a login.

But I don't know of a way to eliminate completely ppl accidentally posting anon. I do it sometimes. Only difference is that I can go into the database and change the userid from Anonymous to mine.

I'd like to be able to do that too.  It's embarrassing to have to put a lame "that was me" underneath your post and during busy periods there is always a chance that another Anon posts between your two posts creating total confusion.  The simplest solution would be to allow people to claim any anon post but if people start abusing it you could limit it by IP address.

[Kiwi]

Goddamn it!  That was me! :wstupid:

[ This Message was edited by: Kiwi on 2004-03-14 17:20 ]

[Froderik]

The simplest solution would be to allow people to claim any anon post but if people start abusing it you could limit it by IP address.

I liked your ideas, but this could get screwy, besides, most IPs are assigned dynamically, like you said, I think you said that..

I think it should be one way (open completely) or the other (everyone who wants to post must login) It seems that there is no viable in-between.

[Cayo Hueso]

I agree with Frod.  I don't think there is any other way around it.  I'm for the free for all.  I don't see a reason to limit anything.  These things that are going on now that have everyone flippin always seem to work themselves out after a while.

The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics
is often very tolerant and human. But when fanatics are on top,
there is no limit to oppression.

--H.L. Mencken

[Kiwi]

The simplest solution would be to allow people to claim any anon post but if people start abusing it you could limit it by IP address.

I liked your ideas, but this could get screwy, besides, most IPs are assigned dynamically, like you said, I think you said that..

That shouldn't be a problem.  You usually spot your mistake straight away so you are on the same IP address.  Those with static IP addresses would be able to claim their posts later too but that would just be a bonus.

Another solution would be to only allow users to claim their anon posts within, say, 20 minutes of them being posted.