Get Polish (EU) Citizenship! 🔗

The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [8]  |  Archives [1] 
 
Witamy, Guest  |  Members
Home / Feedback   48Please login or Register!

Would you favour a free and open PF where people could post under their real names?



Polonius3 1,019 | 12,577    
18 Dec 2016  #1

Would you favor a free and open PF where people could post under their real names rather than hiding behind often idiotic nicks? That would surely make for more meaningful discussion, limit mudslinging and eliminate idiotic concoctions such as PiSlamic or Hairyballsic State. If you agree, then please give your reasons. If you disagree then explain why you favour retaining the status quo.


WielkiPolak 52 | 791    
18 Dec 2016  #2

Well you ask if people about a forum where you could post under your real name. You can do that now. Do you mean a forum where you have to post under your real name?

If so, I wouldn't have an issue with it as I stand by what I say, but I know some folks on here have a habit of prying in to people's personal lives and then posting it on here when they get in to heated discussions.
dolnoslask 2 | 1,174    
18 Dec 2016  #3

You can do that now

Exactly if people want to post their own details they can do.

Rather than giving someone permission to post articles , and kicking off a argument about confidentiality, why not pm the article to the suposed author and let them post that information admitting ownership if they so wish.

All this cloak and dagger rumor of past soviet membership stuff is boring, put up or shut up
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,577    
18 Dec 2016  #4

where you have to post under your real name

That would be a requirement. Otherwise it would give those hiding behind nicks and known for their sneaky snooping and cyber-stalking, an unfair advantage.
Ironside 46 | 8,411    
18 Dec 2016  #5

No! You only saying it all because Harry is getting under your skin and you want to shut him up in this way. Develop tougher skin, stop posting here, get use to it or sort it outside PF. I'm sure that for the most of the long term members of the PF( including you ), Harry's identity is not a secret.
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,577    
18 Dec 2016  #6

Harry's identity is not a secret

But it is. I'm not a snooper. Someone once showed me a photo of lower-case jon but I'm not sure of his name. In general I believe a non-anonymous forum would civilise the discourse and make posters more thoughtful and less reckless with their words. So are you for or against, and why?
smurf 39 | 1,997    
18 Dec 2016  #7

Would you favour a free and open PF where people could post under their real names rather than hiding behind often idiotic nicks?

If you agree, then please give your reasons. If you disagree then explain why you favour retaining the status quo.

So you're Polish Forum Admin yea?

You wouldn't post if you had to use your real name, we all know the lovely-dovey nicey-nicey stuff you post on your Facebook, pretending you're areal swell guy, but us here know the real Polly
Chemikiem 4 | 928    
18 Dec 2016  #8

That would surely make for more meaningful disucssion, limit mudslinging and eliminate idiotic concoctions such as PiSlamic or Hairyballsic State.

Please tell me how knowing a person's identity would contribute to more meaningful discussion? You're talking bollox as usual.
If you admit that your 'Hairyballsic State' is idiotic, why are you inventing these ridiculous concoctions? Anyone would think you were a teenager not an OAP.

some folks on here have a habit of prying in to people's personal lives

Which is precisely why the whole idea is ludicrous and why I certainly would not be in favour of it.

You only saying it all because Harry is getting under your skin and you want to shut him up in this way.

Exactly this.
jon357 70 | 12,784    
18 Dec 2016  #9

You wouldn't post if you had to use your real name

Not a chance of that. The guy would never work again.

Someone once showed me a photo of lower-case jon

Given that none are in the public domain, online or in print, it looks like you've been "showed" a photo of someone else...

You can do that now

Some posters do that already, some choose not to. I know a blog where commentators have to use a real name however nobody verifies it and given that there are several thousand people signed up here, I doubt the mods would want to check that many IDs.
dolnoslask 2 | 1,174    
18 Dec 2016  #10

Not a chance of that. The guy would never work again.

In the old days the Służba Bezpieczeństwa used to take care of that sort of thing, are you taking up the mantle, PF's own SB
Ironside 46 | 8,411    
18 Dec 2016  #11

So are you for or against, and why?

I'm against it. Why? some people what it might came as a surprise to you do have their jobs and carries to consider. Posting on an anonymous forum is akin to a private conversation. No one wants or needs the all world to know what you said in a private capacity.

You could loose your job, have to explain yourself or find yourself to be singled as a person unfit for a promotion or be informed that your contract gonna be terminated. Why bother to post all then?

---
Not to mention that the world is full of all kinds of nutters. They could easily track you down and would **** in the front your doorway, scare your children, hurt your dogs or cats, torch your car, or fling insult in your way.

Who need this kind of crap in their lives>?
Maybe do you as you're obviously bored. Be my guest and post under your real name - no one is stopping you.

Given that none are in the public domain, online or in print, it looks like you've been "showed" a photo of someone else...

Hmm ...you posted your mugshot on PF some time ago. Seems to me that someone has kept a copy of it.
jon357 70 | 12,784    
18 Dec 2016  #12

are you taking up the mantle, PF's own SB

You could probably do better than that. Or perhaps you just don't know how the lower end of journalism works.

Hmm ...you posted your mugshot on PF some time ago. Seems to me that someone has kept a copy of it.

People are welcome to that one, though odd that someone would bother saving it.
dolnoslask 2 | 1,174    
18 Dec 2016  #13

odd that someone would bother saving it.

They probably fancy you Jon
Ziemowit 8 | 2,642    
18 Dec 2016  #14

probably fancy you Jon

Fancy him or not, but you do remember, Dolno, that every time someone mentions little case's real name on the forum they get suspended or get a warning and this real name of his is immediately erased even if littlecase claims this is not his real name. Strange, isn't it?
cms 9 | 1,175    
18 Dec 2016  #15

For the political or business discussions then maybe. But there are also people here posting about legal troubles, marital worries, financial questions etc where probably anonymity is kore constructive.
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,577    
18 Dec 2016  #16

Hairyballsic State

But no more idiotic than PiSlamic state. Both are idiotic and without hiding behind nicks no-one would post such nonsense. This is a limited-access forum so the whole world wouldn't know who swas posting what. The whole reason behind this idea was to show who has the courage of theri ocnvictions and to make people think twice before recklessly throwing words and ungrounded accusations about, slandering others and going off the wall. Maybe radom chat could remain anonymous for the inveterate mudslingers who cannot live without that sort of thing, but the remaining categories would get civilised.
jon357 70 | 12,784    
18 Dec 2016  #17

They probably fancy you Jon

I'm used to that..
Nathans    
18 Dec 2016  #18

Posting under real names is champagne liberals' dream. You can use your real name now, so if you fancy that, sign your posts using your real name. This suggestion has a similar connotation to some of the liberal billionaires ideas who criticize the taxing system claiming that "their secretaries pay more taxes than I do." Well, guess what - you can easily pay more taxes, even 100% of your revenue.. -- do it if you like but don't force others to fall for the same.
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,577    
19 Dec 2016  #19

have to explain yourself

Only if someone posted salacious, libellous or otherwise reckless and provocative comments. A calm and coherent presentsaiton of honest opinion should not trigger all the bad things you claim would happen. But it seems the consensus is against ditching anonymity, becuase it would make sense only if everyone agreed. It certainly would not serve those whose main reason for being on the forum is to bait, provoke, snoop, pry and cyber-stalk other posters.
jon357 70 | 12,784    
19 Dec 2016  #20

Only if someone posted salacious, libellous or otherwise reckless and provocative comments

That covers most of your posts then, doesn't it.

bait, provoke, snoop, pry and cyber-stalk other posters.

Likewise.
Crow 137 | 5,913    
19 Dec 2016  #21

It would be risky. Many sick people in the world.
NoToForeigners 7 | 864    :-(
19 Dec 2016  #22

@Crow
Yeah. Knowing little case's insights and himm being a fa@@ot i wouldnt like to know anything about him.
Crow 137 | 5,913    
19 Dec 2016  #23

Less you know, happier you are.
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,577    
19 Dec 2016  #24

most of your posts

Cyberstalk? I dont' even know how to post an illustration on PF although I see others doing it. And I dont' know how people can scroll back several years. It's someone's guru that has the Gestapo/NKVD mentality of sneak, snoop, pry and spy. We needn't even mention his name because everyone knows who is intended.
KiWo - | 22    
19 Dec 2016  #25

This is a limited-access forum so the whole world wouldn't know who swas posting what

What makes you say that? This forum is open to anyone with an internet connection.
Ironside 46 | 8,411    
19 Dec 2016  #26

Only if someone posted

Nah, if some one's boss, or all their working environment consist of the people who one would justly describe as a regressive left. If you for example (just to fit in) haven't let them know what you think about certain issues or about their idiotic ideology, its a very reasonable to think that you could expect backlash or other unpleasant consequences if such a deception would be discovered. Especially that those are regressive left's people - they're vindictive and close minded.

calm and coherent presentsaiton of honest opinion should not trigger all the bad things you claim would happen

No, matter how you would present yourself on this forum, how reasonable, logical and honest you would be, its about what you say not how you say it. What is that hard to understand>?

It certainly would not serve those whose main reason for being on the forum is to bait, provoke, snoop, pry and cyber-stalk other posters.

You're being bullied and trolled and you're being played like a fiddle . You're letting yourself to be drawn into useless and pointless exchanges with someone who play dirty and there is no way you could passible win playing fair.

What more that is annoying you and you start to rant and rage in righteous indignation which makes them laugh at you even more. What more that encourage people like Harry to do more of the same.

Either learn to play the game or ignore him - those are your only options if you're bothered by Harry.

all the bad things you claim would happen

I'm not saying that all those bad things will surely follow. I'm saying that they might happen or some of them might happen. Don't forged about nutters too. They exist in the real world.

This is a limited-access forum so the whole world wouldn't know who swas posting what.

Polonius you have just proved that you know absolute nought about the Internet. Not only all the world would be able see those names and what was posted by them but you could very easily find everything that is available in the cyberspace about that person.

Limited access. Poor Polonius.
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,577    
19 Dec 2016  #27

Limited access

I reckon I need a course in Gatesian Gadgetarianism 101. Where do I sign up?
peterweg 36 | 2,292    
20 Dec 2016  #28

What makes you say that? This forum is open to anyone with an internet connection.

I bet P3 doesn't realise that he is a few clicks away from his sick filth postings history being very publically linked to his real world.
Chemikiem 4 | 928    
20 Dec 2016  #29

without hiding behind nicks no-one would post such nonsense.

So I presume that if your posts had your real name attached to them, you would stop posting your nasty and vile comments about homosexuals, single mothers, Jews, Germans, black people, the Irish etc etc?

Only if someone posted salacious, libellous or otherwise reckless and provocative comments

You do this all the time yet you have the cheek to complain about others?

It certainly would not serve those whose main reason for being on the forum is to bait, provoke,

Like you, you mean with your endless trolling threads?

I bet P3 doesn't realise that he is a few clicks away from his sick filth postings history being very publically linked to his real world.

It's a shame they're not, especially since he says

to show who has the courage of theri ocnvictions and to make people think twice before recklessly throwing words and ungrounded accusations about, slandering others and going off the wall

I wonder if he would stand by all those homophobic/racist/xenophobic comments if his real name were behind them? Somehow I don't think so.
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,577    
20 Dec 2016  #30

homophobic/racist/xenophobic

I reject and do not buy into PC notions of what is racist, homophobic. xenophobic or what have you. There is nothgin wrong with a little ethnic humour. And don't be so millennial. This was raised a while back and I have since learnt a bit about them. They can be claled the WTF generation. They have no problem with foul language and swear words but get all riled up over what they call "hate speech" with its -isms and -phobias. But not all hate speech. Christophobia and other forms of Church-bashing, even ridiculing God and Jesus is OK, but their pet minorities are the new sacred cows.




Home / Feedback / Would you favour a free and open PF where people could post under their real names?

Please login on the main page or sign up to post in this forum!