Hey all, I’d like to take a time out from the world of publishing to discuss a blog community matter. Town hall meeting! I’ll bring the gavel if you bring the crazy guy who wants to open up the park for deer hunting.
A few weeks back the Ethicist Blog discussed the issue of anonymous commenting.
Ever since I had to close anonymous comments myself a few weeks back due to a single anon (they’ve since been re-opened), I’ve been toying with the idea of permanently closing anonymous commenting.
Here’s the thing – there are absolutely people who use the anonymous function responsibly, whether because they don’t feel like signing in or because they are writing about something sensitive.
But at least 95% of the rude comments on the blog come come from people using the anonymity irresponsibly, saying things they probably wouldn’t say if they signed their actual name. And sometimes these comments can get an otherwise good discussion seriously off track.
I’m wondering what you think – do you like having the option of going anon if necessary? Do you think it adds to the discussion to have people politely registering their anonymous comments? Should we just ignore the few bad apples?
Or would you prefer that people sign their own name?
And if we do keep anonymous options open, what should be the criteria for comment deletion?
I’m not too worried about a few bad apples and definitely don’t take the anons personally, it comes with the territory, but at the same time, it’s important to me that the comments section be a place where good, respectful discussions can take place.
Thanks, everyone!
My vote is to have people comment under their real name. One can still debate issues from whichever standpoint one has; signing your real name ensures that this debate is done with integrity, honesty and courtesy.
I think it's good to keep the anonymous fuction for sensitive issues in which a person may face repercussions, but that being said, this should not be abused or used as a cover for the virulent and spiteful who just want to hurt people. If there is "someone" who shows a pattern of foolishness or negativity, they should be deleted. If this occurs enough times, they'll probably recognize they can't get the impact they want and stop.
I agree with Ann Victor. I think the anonymity of the web is too easy for folks to hide behind and they will then say something they normally never would say if they were actually held accountable for their actions. If someone is too afraid of ruffling some feathers, they might not want to be the one speaking out. I'm a big fan of being responsible for one's actions.
Honestly I don't know. It's really hard to say because there are plenty who do use it responsibly but at the same time plenty see it as a way to be rude and not worry about it reflecting on them.
For me, I wouldn't be affected either way. You could keep them or get rid of them and it still wouldn't bother me.
That probably didn't help much…sorry 🙁
PS I need to add that by "real name" some authors write under/are known by pen names. In such cases, comments could be made under the writing name one is known by.
A lot of people write under sort of pen names here. I only use my first name. And we can certainly say stupid things sometimes, even using our real names.
But the anons do seem to go more hog wild. It isn't as if your blog is begging for more comments.
I see why you have kept the option but I wouldn't miss them.
I’ll be happy to accept whatever policy you adopt in this regard, Nathan. I tend to use my own name rather than Anon when I participate in forums and it’s bothersome when conversations are derailed by insults and fights. On the other hand, anonymous comments are sometimes useful. Some people aren’t able to figure out how to sign in without using the Anonymous choice. Sometimes people want to comment on something in their own writing experience, e.g. their publisher, but don’t want people to identify the publisher as a result of knowing who the author is. And many authors won’t risk speaking honestly if they feel there might be backlash from the publishing community. Would you lose valuable comments if you banned anonymous comments? I’m not sure. I appreciate that you delete highly insulting comments, as those tend to destroy online communities and bring all thoughtful discussion to a screeching halt. I also appreciate the free reign you give to discussions here, only deleting actual insults.
Removing the anon is only a deterrent. People can register screen names under whatever name they want and keep their profile anonymous. So if there's someone who really wants to join in the discussion, but is too shy they can always register under a different name. It's just more work than using the anon option, so maybe it will lessen the drive-by rants that can be so unproductive.
It's insane to use your real name on the internet if you are a serious writer. For a start, words, like mountain tops, get their presence from the surrounding silence. Splashing your opinions everywhere, blogging, publishing in bad ezines–there are a lot of writers ruining their careers this way. Words are our medium; to have force, they need aura; internet exposure ruins that aura. So yes, keep the anonymous function. You'll lose the serious readers and writers if you don't.
If you're afraid to stand up and take credit for saying something, then don't say it. I'm for banning anon comments.
Just now read the Ethicist Blog and strongly agree with the points he made.
Nathan, you are in a position of power. Because you are an agent, many writers who are aspiring to publish are afraid of offending you, or of offending other people in the publishing industry who may be coming here. For that reason, we sometimes feel the need to be anonymous so that we can be honest. If you decide not to allow anonymous commenting, much of that honesty will go away because few people are willing to risk their chances of publication to voice their opinions. So, I think it comes down to what you want your blog to become. Whether you allow anonymous commenting or not, you still have the opportunity to tell us your opinions. That won't change. If you are trying to market yourself as an agent, anonymous comments are necessary. But, if you are trying to open up this blog as a forum for good discussion, I think anonymous commenting is a good idea. Regarding the bad apples, as you put it, this is still your blog. If a comment comes up that you think is out of line, you ALWAYS have the right to remove it, and I would never argue against that.
I'm on the fence on this one, although I'm leaning toward Ann Victor's comment. I used to post anon and then sign "J.F." just because I didn't want to log in; but, I've ceased that laziness and starting logging in to post. 🙂
I'm not sure what would be so sensitive I wouldn't put my name to it. If it's that sensitive maybe I shouldn't be saying it in this type of forum? I don't know – like I said – kind of on the fence; but, if you shut off anon posts, it wouldn't bother me at all. I won't post unless I sign in and behave myself. 🙂
Best,
J.F.
Sorry, I meant to say, "If you are trying to market yourself as an agent, anonymous comments are NOT necessary."
I would assert that anon is important. Debate sharpens us all. As writers we live and die by controversy and conflict. If someone with a provocative point to make hesitates due to the potential of recognition (real or imagined), we — the community — have lost a touch of our edge.
Rudeness can be policed. But I think we want to encourage, or at least not discourage, the outliers on the other side of the bell curve.
Next- You're making me rethink.
Perhaps we should all post annonymously before we destroy our careers:)
I think that there will still be bad apples even if you do ban anon's. I think we should just ignore their comments if rude and unneccesary. And delete them if it dosent contribute to the discussion in a healthy way.
I never minded anonymous comments on my blog, as they usually contributed to the post or conversation.
But two weeks ago I received my first anon spam comment. I had a post about Twilight's success (and how we can try to capture it) and this commenter wrote some rude, hurtful things about Meyer and her fans. I caught the comment early in the morning and rushed in to delete before anyone else noticed.
Luckily, that commenter hasn't returned. I've already decided that if happens again, I'm taking away the anonymity.
I (almost) wouldn't mind controversial comments, if people were willing to stand behind them openly.
Your blog always has so many comments that I usually don't bother reading the ones that are anonymous. I wouldn't miss that feature.
I completely agree with blocking anonymous commentors, especially with the sheer number of people who comment on your blog. I took the approach of an open letter to commentors on my blog a while ago, and I've had very few issues since:
http://jameystegmaier.com/2008/11/16/an-open-letter-to-anonymous-commentors/
I say do away with the anonymous comments. I know some people try to stay as private as they can, but since I'm one who tends to overshare, I have a hard time seeing it from that perspective. Especially if they abuse the policy.
They can always create an ID that has a different name.
ironically I think the anonymous guy made the best point and I agree 100%
I appreciate the generous tone and relative civility of this community, so thank you Nathan for both leading by example and deleting posts as necessary.
There are always going to be some flawed individuals who just want to spew, and unlike the business world, there seem to be few professional repercussions for this behavior in the writing world (Alice Hoffman aside).
Anon posting makes this all too easy. I think you should disable it, and continue to allow people to select what name they post under.
It's not like it is difficult to choose a name (and we're supposed to be creative people). If you want to say something sensitive, use a pen name. It's an incredibly minimal attempt to require some basic manners, and should be respected by anyone who wants to comment publicly.
You should stand behind your words or keep them to yourself.
@ Anon 10:20/10:21 —
I disagree.
Yes, Nathan has the right and option to come in and delete disrespectful comments. But he can't be at the computer 24 hours a day monitoring everything. It could take hours before he catches the controversial commenter, and by that time many people may have been affected.
And yes, Nathan is in a position of power. But are people actually *scared* of him? To the point that they won't disagree with his opinion, for fear of rebuttal or being blacklisted from Curtis Brown?
I think that anonymous comments are similar to twelve shots of tequila. They both allow people the opportunity to be too honest. And often at the expense of other people.
I agree that if someone wants to seriously post something anonymously they can create a different screen name account to post under. I just don't think the anonymous feature is so necessary that we should invite the kind of trolling that's happened. I know some are responsible with it, but just like any other social news site, for example, create a login name that has no attachment to you and don't attach a blog to it. Same thing, a little more work, worth it to keep a level of sanity and not make it so easy for people to spout off if they're just being difficult and not adding anything to the conversation.
In regards to what should be deleted…. that should be strictly up to you. It's your blog and you set the tone between what's acceptable and unacceptable.
If you feel removing the anonymous function will cut down on rude behavior, then by all means pull it. If people want to post a response, but want to retain some anonymity, I would suggest they get a secondary ID. I'm all over the 'net and have multiple emails and userids. I can guarantee people don't know me from one place to the next unless I want them to know.
Your blog, your rules.
Blogs are free for the writing and anyone may have one. Each blogger is free to deal with comments in his own way and dissenters may leave or post on their own blogs.
NO – I personally don't like the idea of anonymous comments, and I've been reading the blog for a while. Even a nom de plume would be better, since you end up with far too many anons to determine which one said what.
Using the anon facility to stay hidden could mean you don't want to be held responsible for what you say, or that you don't have enough confidence to say it publicly. I find it very annoying. Ditto with the bloggers who don't show any of their profile.
If you continue to allow the anon comments, then have some way of identifying them as 1, 2, etc. if that's possible. Using the anon status to post always appears as a cloak to me, so where the dagger? Hm-m-m.
Glad you asked, Nathan.
Have people hide behind the anon status to derail good discussions is a big problem, and it seems to give you unnecessary work to monitor everything.
That being said, I don't know how it would affect people who are very private who would stop offering thoughtful comments if the anon possibility.
The only reason for someone to post anonymously is they are too lazy to set up an account.
I it was very easy to sign up and only took a minute.
Anything worth saying is worth say for yourself.
I vote to keep anonymous commenting as an option. Like Nathan said, most use it responsibly for whatever reason that they have. I've done it from time to time on sensitive issues and would like to have the option to do so in the future.
I think you should keep anonymous comments. Yes, you'll get a few bad apples. But, I think it's a nice way of letting new people ease their way into the commenting process. I don't think its fair to make someone join Google or OpenId or these other services just so you can comment.
Anonymous lets people comment without adding an extra step if they don't already have one of these accounts. Also, sometimes it's nice to be anonymous, especially on a touchy subject.
Not to mention, people do sometimes get sidetracked into side discussions, and post a question they may not want associated with them publicly (i.e. "what if my agent won't return my phone call?").
I've not seen that many bad apple anonymous posts. So, I do hope you keep them.
I eliminated anon comments last year, and have been happy with it.
The reason I did it is because I was getting bot spam which has pretty much been totally eliminated since disabling the anon comments.
A human being, however, can still register a Blogger account under any name and choose to make idiotic statements on your blog.
My policy is that I only delete the comment if it is a personal attack on me or one of my commenters. (Disagreements don't count.)
In two years I've only had to delete two comments because of this, by the way.
My vote is to disable anonymous commenting- for all the reasons others have already outlined.
If you post something that might benefit from anon commenting, you can always allow anons for that one post.
candicekennington brings up a good point. If you have something valid to bring to the discussion and are truly concerned about a negative impact on your career you can always create a login ID that is, for all intents, anonymous.
It's just one extra step and won't eliminate rude or malicious comments but it might deter a few.
If the point is valid and respectfully stated I see no reason why the author shouldn't own it. I've seen two, maybe three comments regarding a specific experience in the industry that I could understand needed to post without identity.
Posting anonymously for the purpose of being just plain mean without repercussion is cowardly but I haven't seen much of that here.
Nathan – you are a creative guy, working in a creative field. I say make the anonymous commenters show their creativity as well: do away with the one click "anonymous" functionality and make those non-spotlight seeking, or bad apple, folks at least come up with a bogus call sign to hide behind.
Personally, I like the non-anonymous comments, especially those linked to a website, because when I find the opinion interesting I can click to follow-through and find out more about that person. I see the comments sections on blogs as a place to build a community around that blog, and it's hard to build community when you don't have any idea who you're talking to.
On the other hand, Next and Anonymous have some points about people fearing that their words could get them in trouble if they're sharing an unpopular opinion. Perhaps if you put up a post that's looking for a certain type of honest reply – one where people might feel a little sensitive about attaching a name – you could allow Anonymous for just those posts? But that sounds like a lot of work, really. Maybe it's more that we need to realize that being honest, as long as it's done with tact and compassion, shouldn't be something that we fear will get us in trouble.
If you take away the anonymous option, you will lose many of the professionals: editors, agents and published authors who want to contribute anonymously. I am one.
Leave the option but delete any iffy comments.
Me thinks that we can all comment under what ever name we chose – our own, a made up pen name, our blogosphere name. BUT, the big difference with commenting anonymously is, to my experience, that as soon as you don't have to sign with any name at all, it is so much easier to be rude and mean. Even if it's a made up name, you will still be at least somewhat nicer if someone can actually address you with a reply that is not addressed simply to anon 10.49…
I know for myself, I always think that I'm not going to post anything I'm not proud to put my name on. We can all be honest here if we do it in a professional and respectful way. A respectfully given opinion shouldn't hurt us unless we're being disrespectful or rude.
I think sometimes we forget that when we want to break into publishing, we are trying to break into a business environment. We should behave like we're talking with potential bosses, co-workers, and important clients, not like we're gossiping with our best friends.
As long as we're professional, we can be as honest as we'd like. If you want to post, post something you're proud to attach your name to :).
Also, if you are wanting to contribute but are just super shy, like others said, you can register under another name. That's the only other valid reason I can see for anonymity.
With the multitude of comments you get from people who do use their names (or pseudonyms), I wouldn't miss the anonymous comments.
But it's your blog, your call.
OMG, I just posted about this today on my blog. I have a husband and wife couple who've been stalking me for a year and leaving really nasty "anonymous" comments. Yeah, I know I have sagging granny boobs–I know!
Still, I allow anonymous comments, though I do moderate them. When I get an anonymous comment, I cross-check my stat counter to see if it came from those lunatics and then I delete it without even reading it.
People are crazy!
No anonymous posting! Only losers who have something to hide use it anyway. Let's do our part to keep the vermin out of these discussions!
I think: if you can't make comments under your name, then you probably shouldn't be commenting. I vote for banning anon comments.
When I see the words "Anonymous said…" I think of people who block their phone number from showing up on call display. They may not all be crank callers, but if you want to be heard (or in this case, read) – be willing to put an identity to the words.
I say get rid of them. I know how annoying it is for me to delete inflammatory comments on my blogs – and my readership consists primarily of friends and family (with a few randoms thrown in), so I try to imagine that x1000 or so.
Trolls are obnoxious and, more importantly, lazy. Most of them won't want to take the time to register a name just to say something spiteful. We know this because most of them won't even take the time to spell check or use appropriate grammar. On the other hand, a responsible anon poster who actually desires to contribute shouldn't find registering a name (fake or real) too prohibitive. It doesn't cost money to create an account and it isn't inconvenient.
I agree with what was said earlier also. You should stand behind the words that you put in print – even if the 'print' is made of electrons instead of ink.
I consider myself a serious reader and writer. I always use my real name and I'm not afraid to voice my opinion. Although I do think about how I phrase comments.
I say away with anons!!
I think if you're afraid to say something under your real identity, that is a CLEAR indication you shouldn't be saying it in a public blog. Find another writer to talk to, or a writer's forum, if you need to air something private/business related. I mean, really, check your fences. There ARE restricted access places for writer's to ask sensitive questions that won't get them thrown on a spike. Go find them! If closing the anonymous function here keeps the conversations manageable, it seems like an obvious choice for the type of blog this is.
Word verification-tormen; This subject before I've had any tea.
I suspect that most people who comment anonymously do so because they just haven't gotten around to creating an ID yet and don't want to bother. I know that's been the case with me in the past, and in fact it still is when I'm on a blog outside of Blogger where my Blogger ID doesn't apply. Or even if I'm on another computer somewhere and therefore not automatically signed in. Then I get lazy and just post anonymously. So I doubt people treasure the anonymity as much as the usage of it suggests.
To me, we're not discussing anything politically sensitive here that you're likely to be punished for later. Possible, but unlikely. In this context, sabotaging a helpful discussion is the bigger problem. So I would recommend turning off the anonymous commenting. It's not a grievous trampling of free-speech rights. You're still welcome to go say whatever you want somewhere else.
I think if it's enough of an issue that you feel the need to post about it, that should answer your question. It takes all of two minutes to make a profile, and you don't have to use your real name. Why do we have anonymous comments at all? You can still post anonymously under an alias.
And I totally disagree with the comment that following and posting on blogs will ruin your chances at a successful career. I'd like to see proof of that, because my experience has been just the opposite.
If you're so damn timid not to sign a post, how are you ever gonna have what it takes to shake up or surprise the *WORLD* with your words? (What? Ya gonna write the controversial dicey parts in #2type)?
LOL, I'm laughin' so hard I broke a hemorrhoid stitch!
Haste yee back 😉
Nathan, thanks for sharing the Times article. I agree that all too many thoughtful people have stopped commenting in cyberspace because of a few vocal nutcases who thrive on flame wars.
I moderate my blog to ensure no one leaves inappropriate comments. But I don't get much traffic yet. My 1st book will be out in 2011. Guess you'll be celebrating that year, too. 🙂 Gotta get back to my revisions – congrats again on your sale!
You can't hunt deer in the park?
I would keep the anon option open and delete the rude posts. The other option is to review comments before listing them. I like the anon option for situations where I want the reader to follow the comment and not me. I am always polite, never rude. Shame on those using anon as a weapon. It is a powerful tool, same as using a pseudonym when writing.
First, I have to say that I have been impressed in general with the types of comments I find on your posts, Nathan, and I think that a lot of that is due to the respectful atmosphere that you have created here. I go to other blogs, and find real jerks commenting.
There are cases that I can think of where there is a real need for anonymity– but I wouldn't comment without signing my name.
This has been a subject of controversy at Verla's blueboards as well.
That being said, this is your playground– you get to set the rules. We'll play however you want, Nathan.
Thank you for asking our opinion about this, Nathan, before making a decision.
My input would be to keep the anonymous commenting. I was there the day you stopped it. The entire feeling of the blog changed. The discussion felt careful and inhibited.
Also, important people were missing, because if you drop anonymous, you also drop Name/Url.
It's frustrating, and more work for you, that some people will not handle the openness and controversy well. But unfortunately, I think it's unavoidable, unless you stop the discussions altogether.
This is such an important forum, Nathan. Writers need a voice right now, and I think your blog is one of the few places where the writer can feel free to speak openly. That's so important with the changing landscape of the publishing industry.
If you want more control without getting more flack, I do have a suggestion, though. You could post 'posting rules' on the sidebar. Rachelle Gardner does something like this. Then, when you have to delete a comment, you can simply say: sorry, folks, rule #4.
I've also noticed the correlation between rude comments and the Anon feature. I agree that if professionals/writers out there don't want to use their real name, it's not hard to make up a name to use for commenting – there are plenty of regular readers here with fabricated names. One of the things I love about this blog is the community that Nathan has built and the fact that people disagree in thoughtful and respectful ways.
Nathan, it seems like extra work for you to have to moderate/delete the crazies but that's for you to decide.
The only time I would ever use anonymous commenting– or prefer getting it– would be if someone was asking people to express what could be damaging facts about themselves, like "Have you ever cheated on your taxes?" Asking for honesty in such a situation requires allowing a way out.
I had an unpleasant anonymous commenter recently and I considered switching off the option. I figured that if someone couldn't leave their name, then their comment was not really of interest anyhow. THEN a few weeks after when this certain individual seemed to have taken my advice and buzzed off, an anonymous comment dropped into my inbox.
I groaned inwardly and thought 'here we go again' … but instead of the horrid person, it was a lovely lady with a lovely comment and I thought to myself that had I turned off the option, I might not have received it. Turned out she doesn't have an account and I also think some people simply don't know how to leave there name without a link anyway.
So, I would say – for the few bad ones that get through, it's not worth turning it off all together. Also, I tend to delete anything really crappy 🙂
Real Names please . . . or really good blogger name. Personally, I use my name and my real picture and everything links back to my Blogger blog.
If I'm willing to make a comment, I'm willing to stand behind that comment as well.
S
Okay, word verify is 'flabs'. I seriously hope Blogger isn't implying that I have a weight issue . . . because that's just rude. : )
I am way too self-centered to post anonymously. Although I did post one time under the guise of "Some Overlord" to poke fun at Mira, but that's a different matter altogether.
I know that many reasonable anon commentors post that way because they are at work and cannot sign on. I for one would hate to be responsible for their return to full productivity and thus support the continuation of anonymous commenting.
I'm big on not hiding behind anonymous to take pot shots. But I think having an anonymous account is important in this industry. Authors do not feel comfortable publicly talking about their negative experiences with their own face on it. We're expected to present a pleasant, unified front when it comes to our books.
Look at Justine Larbalestier- it wasn't until two news outlets put a focus on the issues with her whitewashed LIAR cover that she- an author who is one of the most outspoken, and least concerned with generating controversy- felt comfortable making a public statement. And even then, she was utterly diplomatic.
I'm sure agents and editors would appreciate the same kind of anonymity from time to time. Just because a name isn't signed doesn't mean it's trolling.
Perhaps you should implement the "anonymous" feature that's used on the Verla Kay boards. YOU create an Open ID account, and you give the login and password in your blog. Change the password weekly, and post it in your Friday roundup. That way people who have something they need to contribute anonymous still have a way to do so, but you don't have people going all cowboy with it.
Nathan –
Regardless of whether you keep the Anons or not, you should have a Terms of Service guideline for posting, and delete those that don't adhere to it. It could simply be "Don't be a rude jerk, as judged by Nathan Bransford."
If eliminating the Anon makes it easier for you to monitor, then go ahead. But, even if you eliminate the Anon option, people should still be expected to have the same level of decency that you bring to your fabulous blog.
I love that you lead by example.
Nathan,
I'd love to read a post on this comment from Next: "Splashing your opinions everywhere, blogging, publishing in bad ezines–there are a lot of writers ruining their careers this way. Words are our medium; to have force, they need aura; internet exposure ruins that aura."
Blogs, yes or no? Current consensus seems to be yes.
"bad ezines", what's the definition and does it tarnish a fledgling career?
Can I be honest? The thing I worry about is not being anon. It's the reaction from those loyal subjects of some blogs that have followers like pitbulls, which attack dissension with gusto. That's scarier than any anon comment. If the comment is over the line with regards to respect- swearing, name calling, inappropriate discussion (as in has nothing to do with the conversation.) then obviously you have the right to delete it. (As with ANY comment, anon or otherwise…*) If the comment is merely disagreeing with the premise in a respectable manner, then no it should be given the same consideration as those comments which are in agreement.
I think it's important to respect the opinions of the minority.
There are some fascinating comments, that people won't leave unless they can do so anonymously. I would vote to keep the anon-comments function open.
At the same time, people can set up a blog with a nonsense name. Even when we sign in, we're as anonymous as we want to be.
The criteria I'd use for deletion is (1) any form of hate speech, (2) excessively-negative opinions that don't include any justification, (3) anything that serves only to derail the discussion, offensive or not.
agreed, agreed, agreed.
i think it's nice to have the anon option (as a blog owner) if nothing other than it may garner you more hits/eyeballs. BUT i have a massive problem with people who use the comments — not just on blogs, but on newspaper sites — to badmouth anyone and everything from the author, to obama, to another commenter.
these are things that these cowards, hiding behind the anon feature, would never say in person.
so, yeah, much as I like it from a traffic perspective, I'd say if the anons are the core issue, shut 'em down.
Rick, that was you??
Color me impressed. There are many, many things I don't do well, but I'm good at blogs when they become a dance of wits – I've lost aruguments, of course, but that is the only time I've been cornered like that.
Respect, man.
I agree that anonymous comments should be disabled. Making an alias is not very time consuming, especially in comparison to the time you might spend moderating those anonymous comments.
I also agree that you might consider anonymous comments if the topic of your post seems more sensitive.
And I don't agree with Next.
I am a serious writer and have no issue with posting under my name. I'm not saying anon posting (with courtesy) isn't okay, I'm just saying that turning it off does not discourage "serious writers" – at least not this one.
In fact, not being anonymous forces me to measure my words and to be more respectful of how I express my opinion. When one begins to build a brand, this is necessary practice.
None of the above is to say polite anon comments shouldn't be allowed – I just disagreed with the assumption that eliminating them somehow ruled out "serious writers".
MeganRebekkah, I like your comments, especially the last line of your 10:27 comment. Also, Melanie Avila made a good point, which is someone can always set up an account with a pseudonym.
I don't think you should allow anonymous comment. I just figure if you're going to put it out there, you ought to be able to attach your name to it. If you're saying things you shouldn't (even when dealing with sensitive subjects), then perhaps you should think twice before saying it.
I say leave anonymous posting enabled and then feel free to remove any you wish. Personally, I think the anons add content without it falling back in their faces.
But… your blog. I can see that moderating everything could become a serious time suck.
I've had a really rude comment from some lame-o who wouldn't step up to the plate and say who they really were…
My vote is to can the anon comments…only opens the door to trouble…
Personally, I favor their removal, with one caveat: I think it's extremely important to allow for posting under screen-names and pseudonyms.
Online anonymity (as a separate matter from anonymous comments) is an important tool, used by many people in disadvantaged situations. They can post honestly if it can't be tracked to them, but if linked to their real life, could lead to serious problems.
The previous example, about commenting regarding a publisher, is a good case-in-point.
No anon comments! There are people who hide behind them to act irresponsible, like many others have said before me.
Are you talking about taking off only the "Anonymous" option? Or taking off both the "Anon" option AND the "Name/URL" option?
On one hand, I honestly don't know why so many prospective authors are scared to let agents know their thoughts. I want to be a part of the online community and get my name out there. I can't do that if I don't sign my name! And if I can't figure out how to take part in a conversation (even to disagree) without doing it politely, then I probably shouldn't do it at all.
However… I think anon posters fall into three groups.
1) The jerks
2) People who have a legitimate reason for posting anon. (I've done it once or twice when I was posting a give-away-ending to one of my stories, and I didn't want people to connect the two.)
3) The Internet newbies. That's mostly whom I'm concerned about, 'cause I could always create an alternate profile for #2 reasons if they come up again.
See…I've done workshops for offline writers, showing how blogs like this one are quickly becoming something every writer should spend a little time on, because it'll strengthen their writing, inform them about the industry, etc. Quite a few of the people taking my workshop are Internet-illiterate. They find the concept of "creating an online account" of ANY type daunting. Sure…if they hang around long enough, they'll figure it out and create an account. But first they'll want to read, then they'll want to make a comment and question, and only THEN will they feel bold enough to create an account.
So if the "Name/URL" option is still open, you wouldn't be shutting these people out before they reach that level of comfort.
That's what I'd be careful not to do, because these are some of the writers that need your blog the most.
I don't appreciate anonymous comments on my own blog, so I'd say keep them out. I'm still laughing about deer hunting in the park. Nice.
I vote for no anonymous comments.
I will never comment anonymously. Period.
If I care about something enough to comment, then I will sign my name to it. I'm not ashamed of my opinions, and even if I disagree I try to be cordial and respectful. My handle is just my initials, but I always put my first name at the end of my comments so replies can be addressed to me.
I would not be upset or surprised if you chose to take away anonymous comments. Even for those that wish to be "anonymous," they can always use a pen name. (See Moonrat and EA.)
And it's not that hard to just… sign in.
~Tara
I think you should allow Anonymous option because there are those who may have a legitimate question and must keep their identities secret. If someone chooses to attack anonymously, they’re just revealing their cowardice. Those comments should be removed. However, if someone has something negative to say, even against you, and they sign their name, the comment should stand. IMHO.
I stand behind what I say in comments and never choose the Anon option. I’m also one who doesn’t like to stir the pot so I don’t have to worry (usually).
I have an agent and have published many books, but I still like to read your blog. I wouldn't comment here my real name because of the admittedly slight chance that my agent were to discover I was reading and responding to other agents' blogs. I wouldn't want to offend her. Without the anonymous option, you'd lose my input and possibly the input of other agented authors.
Also, it is considered bad form to complain about publishing (both by publishers and by many unpublished writers who think that getting the "brass ring" means that any published author who complains about his presumably now perfect lives is a whiny prima donna). So smart authors won't say anything negative about publishing under their real names.
I've read agent blogs that don't allow anonymous postings. Many of these comments seem kiss-assy, like the commenters think that if they applaud the agent a lot, they will get signed on as a client. I find those kinds of comments less than useful. I would hate to see your blog comments seem like Compliments from the Nathan Bransford Fan Club.
I myself am a fan of yours, but I don't agree with you 100 percent of the time and would like the opportunity to disagree without having to worry that my career could be jeopardized.
I would not even make these points now if I could not be anonymous.
Sometimes our established identity is not genre-appropriate. I had been writing MG fiction before I was asked to collaborate on a memoir project. My login accounts for Blogger and Live Journal link directly to that children's writer identity.
I have not yet created the one that will be associated with the current book. Since my partner and I are only 3/4 of the way through our first draft it's not at the top of my to-do list.
I like being able to comment here under a pseudonym, but I would not create another account just so I could have participation privileges.
As someone who registers comments under a pseudonym, I find it difficult to condemn the use of anonymous comments.
However, I'm a guest here. I understand that, should I fail to maintain a minimum level of civility, I will be asked to leave. How Nathan chooses to enforce my absence likely depends on the level of my transgression and on the amount of time he can afford to devote to blocking me. Some bloggers choose to screen comments, but although this is effective, I bet it is also time-consuming.
Sometimes, I guess, the amount of disruptive noise from anonymous comments rises to the point where it's easier to disable them than to weed them out. In those cases, I believe Nathan has an obligation to his guests here to do so, and I welcome his intervention.
I created the Ulysses ID because I wanted to remain anonymous while I dabbled in the blogosphere. I wanted to comment in places where anonymous comments are not allowed, yet I didn't want my real name well known. I expected to make a few etiquette mistakes and give unintended offense as I learned how to get along in this society. I didn't want those goofs associated with me when the time came to approach agents professionally. Being anonymous gives me a certain freedom. I can say anything, but I choose to keep my comments civil and welcome correction when I violate etiquette. I like to think that I use my anonymity responsibly.
Obviously, there are those who do not.
This topic pulls me in both directions. I feel much more free to say what I think behind a screen name that isn't linked back to me. I'm not trying to hide behind it. This is just my current comfort level with my web presence right now.
It's unfortunate the Name option is removed when you deleted the Anon option a while back. I would rather see you keep Anon because I think you'll get more honesty.
I don't understand why "Anonymous" commenters don't just adopt a pen-name and use that. What I don't like about plain ole' Anonymous is that when you have too many of them, it's really hard to have a conversation and keep them all straight.
Anon at 11:18 wrote
Nathan,
I'd love to read a post on this comment from Next: "Splashing your opinions everywhere, blogging, publishing in bad ezines–there are a lot of writers ruining their careers this way. Words are our medium; to have force, they need aura; internet exposure ruins that aura."
Let me clarify what I mean. In an age of information overload, the only way the word will have an aura to it, is if the writer is selective about where and how he uses his words. Otherwise, words themselves are cheapened, and the words the writer uses become no different from the words other writers uses. So, you need to be selective in how you represent yourself. It seems to me taking part in comment threads is career suicide, which is why not many serious writers show up to these threads, under their own identities. To pen another metaphor: your work is like a single-malt. If you dilute and hand it around for free, no one will take your brand seriously. They'll sniff you out for a fake.
We don't need anonymous–we have pseudonyms, nom de plumes. Just because you have to have a name doesn't mean it has to be the right one.
It's just as easy to post using a fake name as the Anonymous tag.
(Travener)
http://www.thebiglitowski.blogspot.com
Personally I would leave anonymous posting intact. What I'd really like to see is when someone (anon or not) makes a post that is inappropriate, that the rest of the commenters ignore that post. Then the topic does not get derailed. Problem solved.
I myself prefer to leave my name, but there are definitely cases where I would prefer to post anonymously – such as relating a negative experience with a particular editor or publisher. It's a small industry, and I'd like to keep working in it.
Also, occasionally I find myself on a website where I'd like to post a comment, but I do not belong to that particular site. I have so many stupid usernames and passwords now that if I don't foresee myself following that blog regularly, I would rather not post than have to make yet another account and have it cluttering up my passwords file. There are times when I do have something useful to add, but I just can't bear to make another stupid account. In those cases I would post anon, or not post at all.
As much as I try, I simply can't see any necessity for an Anonymous commenter option. If people are truly concerned with the sensitive nature of their comments, they can use a pen name or simply their first name. Given that option, I can't see any reason why an anonymous option is necessary.
In terms of criteria for deleting anonymous comments, I think it should be at your discretion, Nathan. It's your site, and if you think that a comment is inappropriate or offensive, particularly if you also believe that it's not adding to the dialogue in any meaningful way, then you should feel free to delete it. The problem with coming up with specific 'criteria' (to quote the post, not for emphasis:) ) for deleting comments is that there most certainly will come a time when something doesn't quite meet the official 'criteria' for deletion, but that you feel should be deleted for other reasons. I, for one, would trust your discretion.
People can use whatever name they want for the name/URL, which leaves it somewhat anonymous, since you can write "Anonymous" in the box.
As has been stated, you're being very kind by asking us, but it's your blog; if you're unhappy with the anonymous commenting, then it's totally cool to change that.
Mira,
Yep, that was me. But I only did it that one time, I swear. And I thought it was pretty funny (still do). You know I am your arch nemesis.
To keep this relevant to the topic at hand, I think this illustrates the point many have made that you can easily mask your identity, and it's your choice if and when you choose to reveal it.
WORD VERIFICATION: metter. Originates from a popular song lyric about a transvestite: I metter in a club down in old SoHo, where you drink champagne and it tastes just like cherry cola…
I don’t get to participate as much as I would like because I usually can’t get into the blog until later in the evening. But I do enjoy the conversations, especially the debates that many times ensue because of comments made by the anonymous. I’d hate to see those curtailed.
However, I think the majority of blog participants are savvy enough to know that they can create multiple logons, and I've suspected more than once that certain regulars use secondary identities. There’s nothing wrong with that.
I've always been of the opinion that people should use alter-identities on the internet anyway. I think most of us could agree that we wouldn't want something that our teenage-selves thought or said to haunt our writing careers in the future.
I’ll admit to having made a few anonymous comments when I didn’t want to logon, but if I have to logon to make a comment, then I would if feel strongly enough.
I'd say do what you want, Nathan. If you want people to use a pseudo identity in place of a generalized anonymous, well, I'd say that certainly will make identifying individual Anons. within a discussion thread much easier.
My vote is to maintain the anon, since it encourages sincerity, and have a strong moderation policy.
I sign myself "reader" which of course, is probably the same as using Anon because:
1) I don't have a blog or website to promote.
2) When I signed up for a blogger account (specifically to comment on blogs) so I didn't have to use "anon" I was only able to make one comment before it no longer worked. (now it won't let me sign in at all)
3) My first name is so common I know five other writers with it, but my last name is so unique that I would worry about being stalked. (yes, I'm completely serious, I've had a stalker experience before. Plus there are many crazy people out there.)
However, this is your blog and though I like participating under "reader" if you chose to delete that option, then that is what you should do. I can read along, I don't HAVE to comment. 🙂
I don't believe in censorship so I think an anonymous commenter is a-okay.
But you, since this is your blog, you have the right to delete any rude or inappropriate comments.
But I feel like anyone can give a fake name, too. They can set up a fake account or whatever and still be just as vile.
Anonymous is okay. If language or obscenity gets out of hand or name-calling, simply delete. And we all move on.
Ignore the bad apples. The just want attention.
I say leave the "anonymous" option for people who may be looking for an agent and are not ready to reveal their real name to the world. Under these circumstances, privacy may be important.
Negative comments can always be deleted.
blt
I've used the anonymous function before, when posting about a sensitive subject. so I understand the need for it and think it's good. But I also think, if it's getting out of hand, then it's better to not have it. Unfortunate. But nobody likes rudeness.
i hate anonymous posters, your name blog, or email should always be visible.
you need to be held accountable even on the internet.
take down the anonymous posting.
I don't know whether to leave or remove anonymous posting, but a little piece of humanity dies every time someone makes a rude anonymous comment. It's very easy to get into the rude anonymity thing, and I got in trouble once by being rude in an internet forum where some of my real-life friends also posted. Especially people new the the internet might not realize the damage that mean posts can do. I would probably say boot the anons because they don't often add anything contructive.
I'd like to see name-only. This site is a good PR training ground for people who could find themselves in the public eye as professional writers. Commenting under a name should make them consider the image they want to project to their readers. Just a thought …
I haven't read all the comments yet, but I WILL after I find a good blackberry scone recipe while hubby's at the store and can still get my ingredients… That being said, I simply have to throw my two cents into the mix, before the comment count gets too high.
Personally, I've never been a fan of the Anonymous commenting function. Speaking as someone who is sincere without it, I don't really understand the need for it. Besides, you can always set up a Blogger account with no personal info if you so desire. While I realize that NOT having the Anonymous commenter function might curtail some people's willingness to discuss, most of the time the really sensitive stuff that emerges from Anonymous commenters is more vitriolic and off-topic than said commenters might otherwise write if their identities were known.
The incident from several weeks back was a good case in point – the "Goose" stirred a pot that I'm not sure needing stirring, and I'm saying this as someone who unfortunately felt the need to jump into the fray (without the shield of anonymity). I'm sorry that there are some commenters who would prefer to leave polite comments anonymously – I hope they won't refrain from commenting if the Anonymous option was gone from the site… but I resent those that use it as a shield to say whatever they want, whenever they want to… which, to me, smacks of cowardice.
For the most part, this is a very respectful community – something I love about your site, Nathan – and I'd like to see it stay that way.
But that's just my opinion – as Marilyn Peake wrote, I'll happily accept whatever decision you make. And, in the future, I'll try to refrain from egging on a rude Anon.
Now, I'm off to find a blackberry scone recipe! Any suggestions?
keep it open. I have a google account but I comment so infrequently that when I do, I've forgotten the sign-in information. deleting the anon element would exclude people who are too LAZY (moi) or are not into an avatar pic or whatever. when I have commented on something, as I'm doing now, it's spontaneous. the flow of thought/comments outweighs the random moments when the discussion goes off the rails. keeping it open – and you're good about deleting nuttiness or what you don't like – is better. also, it's not really "anonymous." with blogger, I'm pretty sure you can check the site traffic or counter & figure out who's who, if you really need to. Tomas who's too lazy to figure out his google account.
Rick, it was pretty funny. I thrilled to see I chose my arch-nemesis so well. 🙂
Nathan, sorry to over-post, but I did notice that people are focusing on whether to close anon posting or not. Your other question: what should be the criteria for deletion….
These should definitely follow your preferences. But my two cents:
to be deleted:
a. Disrespectful tone.
b. Personal attacks or flaming, including name calling, insults or slurs
c. Profanity
And my sense of your preferences:
d. Discussion of politics
e. Posts that stray too far from the topic (these can often just be given a nudge by the moderator, too. If he has time.)
And, of course:
f. Rhetorical questions
I've never posted anonymously, however I agree that sometimes the anon posters are a bit, shall we say, feisty? They also tend to be a bit longer winded. That said, sometimes their comments are helpful and nudge the conversation in a more interesting direction. As with any blog, comment deletion criteria should be solely up to the blog owner's discretion.
Word ver: debut
What I hope to release with the next year or so.;-)
I guess I agree that it is easy enough to create a new profile if you are concerned about sensitive issues or offending the original author (in this case Nathan). I have 3 email addresses and could use one with a nonsense name (even with only the one, I never know if it will pop up as Hart, or the Watery Tart)…
but at least when it isn't entirely anonymous–a real offender can be tracked… regular readers can keep an eye open and give them a good French Taunting when they are out of line. They are less free to spread their venom everywhere, and so will be more likely to self-censor a little (a good thing).
I guess the Name/URL function is also "anonymous"? I always attach my name, so it's clear which entries are made by me.
If the Name/URL option isn't available, I probably won't comment. However, if there is a discussion I particularly want to join, I guess I'll break down and sign up for a blogger account.
It's not a big deal, either way. Do what's best and easiest for you.
I keep reading the arguments for both sides and I have to say that I personally don't read the anonymous comments – not all the time. Generally, I skip over them because I don't attach a real person to them. I know that sounds crazy, but that's just the way I see it. I like, and respect people more, when they use their real names (or screen names).
I understand the argument about being a professional writer and not wanting to hurt your reputation – but I wonder how many big time authors read this blog and feel that they need the anonymous function? (Nathan, you would know this answer better than anyone.)
At the end of the day I say whatever makes your life easier. You've already had a trial run with anons turned off – so how'd it go? Why did you decide to reopen them?
I prefer real names. Definitely.
I like your criteria, Mira – and, Rick, your logic does kinda make sense… for an overlord.
Man, I so wish I had been there for that little sparring… I've never really seen Mira cornered before.
P.S. Oh, Rick. I love the Kinks! Can't believe you worked them into the blog like that… 🙂
I say no anon commenters, but, other than that one you mentioned a couple of weeks ago, I haven't had any issues with other anons — just like the idea of using your name (or pseudonym — the name's not really Bane, though sometimes I wish it were 😉
Anonymous commenters are the Joe Wilsons of the writing community.
I prefer staying anonymous because, frankly, I prefer to remain that way. I'm a writer with an agent (yet to be published, still working on rewrite). While there are a few bad apples hiding in the anon sobriquet, if they get out of hand…or as any comment signed or not gets out of hand…delete the comment. Deciding on what comment crosses the line is pretty easy to determine. Simply delete those. We trust your judgment…this is your blog after all.
Some of these anonymous comments in the last week have been creepy and hurtful. I found them upsetting. I vote for disabling anon comments.
For anon commenters who want to remain anon (b/c of agents or whatever), you can create non-available profiles under goofy usernames (e.g., NathanBransfordHatesAnons).
Most anons always seem to have a valid reason for commenting as anons. If you take that away, then they won't be free to offer what could be valuable advice.
However, I strongly believe it's up to you and it's your choice. I know that anons can really bother some bloggers, and I respect that. And I wouldn't stop reading this blog if you dropped anons.
I feel that if (and when) my blog were as big as your blog than I most definetly would set it up so that anonymous comments were unavaliable. But this is just because I'm lazy, and I do read everyone of my comments. If I didn't have to worry about anonymous comments (especially the rude ones), then that would be a lot less work for me.
There's no reason that anyone who wants to post can't either sign their real name or come up with a good fake name if they really want to be anonymous. If I deeply desired to speak out on a sensitive issue that I was uncomfortable signing my name to I would just simply make up a name to use for that post. It's not that difficult to do. However, I've never felt the need to post as anyone other than myself.
I think anyone who wants to post a comment responsibly should not fear repercussions so much. We're all mature here on this blog and you've cultivated a place where mature adults can discuss a variety of topics freely. Anonymous comments can be used to disrupt that discussion with rude and obnoxious commentary not fitting the atmosphere of this blog.
That's my two cents worth anyway.
I would like the anon comments to stay active. We can just set some guidelines for the bad apples, both for the commenters and for deletion. If there's a bad comment, blog readers should just brush it off and ignore the comment until it gets deleted and continue the discussion at hand. And of course any inappropriate comment should be removed (or off-topic comment).
I think it would be ashame to disable the anon comments. Like others have said, anon comments do have good comments most of the time, and for people like me who do not have an account to log into wouldn't be able to comment at all on interesting subjects. I just think it'd be a diservice to all who enjoy the blog to disable a group of writers from commenting.
I totally agree with Anon 10:20. I'm another "lurker" who doesn't speak up much and prefer to keep a low profile, so I enjoy anonymity. When I do comment I am sometimes afraid of making an idiot of myself in front of people I respect quite a lot (Nathan, readers of this blog, and members of the writing/publishing community) so I usually avoid using my actual name. Everything I write sounds dumb the next morning. I guess I shouldn't be so timid, but that's my nature. On the other hand, writing under a real name/account would force me to think through my comments a lot more before posting and be more confident about them, and that's always a good thing. I could go either way on this one and will still read and participate regardless.
Hi, I always comment ANON. Not because I am being secretive, but because I cannot log on to any account from where I work. If you take it off I won't comment anymore, mainly becuase by the time I get home it is too late, I'm busy writing, and my internet is slow.
It's okay if you want to cut me off, I understand. If I do comment it usually with a stupid question or an off the wall POV.
I did want you to know that I am sure I am not the only one in the position that they have no other option than to be ANON.
Thanks,
JO
By the way, I've never read a single rude comment on this blog, part of the reason I enjoy it so much. Great policing so far, Nathan!
I think it is a tricky question. People should have the courage to admit who they are if they are critising someone else but sometimes people can be more honest if they feel their identity is protected. Unfortunately though some people will always abuse this – sad but true.
Kate x
You can cut anon if you like. I don't think I've ever posted under anon. I mean, really, what's so sensitive that you can't just spit it out under your own name? And maybe if it is, you should think twice about saying it anyway…
Of course, I'm on a bit of a Be Nice rant this week. I'd send the rude anons back to kindergarten, but it's not fair to the nice kids already there.
I think people should sign their names. It's not that hard to go make up an alias on blogspot.com and still have a shade of anonymity (hence my pseudonym, Jade Park and eponymous writing blog)…
And I find that whatever you have to say, you should sign your name to it. Way more accountability.
p.s. it's your blog, you should do what you want. I haven't had big problems with anonymous trolling but if I did, I wouldn't hesitate to put the kabosh on anonymous commenters.
I'm not sure why it's so hard to sign in to post. That's a minor inconvenience at most. While I don't mind anon comments per se, they shouldn't be used to be rude. If one wants to flame something, then own up and stick your name on it. Otherwise don't say anything. If you keep anon comments, which is fine by me, I think you should feel free to delete as you see fit, Nathan. It is after all, your blog.
Well there sure is consensus on this one! ha ha
When I first created my blog I created a 'google username' (there's those darn single quotes again). I did it because I wasn't sure if I wanted to be outed. So now I have four options when I go to a blog — my google name, my real name, any other name I decide to make up for purposes of the post, or anonymous. I can live without anonymous. That said, I would not disable it for my own blog — I think people like the option. I prefer to just delete any truly inappropriate comments.
It doesn't really affect me if some anon commenter has a grumpy day. Perhaps they have a beef against the daily topic, who knows? BUT, I know that you can't always stare at your blog with the job of "Comment Approval" (do you hate those quotes?). So, I suppose if you find that a big chunk of your day is screening comments, then I'd ditch the anons. Otherwise, I'd keep 'em and let people comment how they may. I don't find much of anything offensive.
I always tought that people who use their names in comments are trying to establish an internet presence which is smart if they want to build a platform.
But some of us just want to comment here and there without too much hassel. If you take away the anonymous option, we won't comment.
Is it worth losing our input because a few bad apples?
The anonymous comments function is useful for people who want to ask something about publishing without getting themselves into trouble.
I allow anonymous commenting on my blogs, but hey are all moderated too. And I "reject" spam comments.
I haven't had any negative comments yet, but I suppose it would depepnd on the comment on what I would do about it.
I think that anonymous commenting is helpful on blogs where the topic is of a sensitive nature–and book publishing doesn't count. I mean, people can always email if they have a sensitive question they don't want posted, but your posts are always about topics where if people are speaking respectfully, they shouldn't be squeamish about having it connected to their name. I think needing to stand behind your words makes people think twice before hitting publish. Er…at least I hope it does.
I rarely use the anonymous function, but I understand why people would want to. When I do use it, it's to protect my privacy, not to say something sensitive.
I like it when people sign their name or a consistent pseudonym, and wish there was a way for the name/url option to remain available while the anonymous one is removed.
You have the absolute right to determine which comments offend you and which could be offensive to your readers. You are the master of this blog. My opinion on this subject doesn't matter.
If you can't own up to what you're saying, it shouldn't be said. If there's one comment you desperately want to make, but don't want it under your name, make an account with a false name. You might get blocked, but you had your say. If you are having this need often, you might want to rethink your mindset.
Definitely take away the Anonymous option for comments. It's a shame a few spoil it for many, but that's life. If someone wants to write something and it is sensitive and they don't want their real name used, they can always sign up for an account with a different screen name. Sure, they could still leave ridiculous and rude comments, but at least this way they may be traceable and might think before they hit send. Just a thought…
I prefer people to leave comments under their real names, taking responsibility for what they say. I’m willing to accept consistent pseudonyms, first names, and the like.
But there’s a technical aspect, too. I find it easy to sign on to some blogs, harder to sign on to others, and I can’t figure out why. So I figure other people have the same problems.
We can always add our names manually, of course. But from the blog owner’s point of view, that would require enabling anonymous comments and then deleting any that don’t have some signature attached.
Life is full of rude and strange people.
Keep it real.
I think we can all have healthy, productive blog conversations under our real names. People will disagree sometimes, and that is okay. It just needs to be done respectfully.
I also think non-anonymous commenting is nice for when people want to respond to something someone else said. It is a lot easier to say refer to "Jane Doe" than "ANON 4:47PM"
I don't like the "real name" comments much, because they are invariably stale, "best-foot-forward-because everyone's-watching-me-now" publicitiy attempts. You end up with a sterile experience where people hand out virtual business cards (OK, here's my polite take on the situation, never mind what I really think, now BUY MY STUFF!"
So I'm actually in favor of the other extreme, a blog where anonymity is mandatory, because it's so much more real, as well as entertaining.
that said, I realize that I'm here for the infotainment aspect of it, in contrast to the legions of wannabe authors who think that having their real name out here will iln some way aid them on their "journey to publication." But it gets old reading the same ole same ole.
Also, I think a lot of anons like to post from work machines, where you don't want to log in because it leaves a bigger "footprint," if you will, of non-work related web usage.
Its really sad that a few can ruin everyone's fun, but I think most of the people I have seen on this blog have been polite.
I also sympathize with those who don't have any option except to be Anonymous since that was me just a month ago. And truthfully I like still having the option, because it can be a pain to use the open id if you're in a hurry. So I vote Anon commenting stays open, but I don't really have strong feelings on this either way.
I still have faith in humanity, even if its not very much.
Real names only. Own your opinion.
I just read this post and the linked one and, wow, there are real issues here to that need to be considered.
I learned early on that there are predators and, hey, I'm a really sensitive soul. I don't want to do harm. But I also don't want to be on the receiving end of someone with a mean streak either.
Being anonymous has allowed me to feel safe enough to participate and I try really hard to be nice.
A few times, I realized, to my huge embarrassment (yes, even anonymous embarrassment)that what I thought was being fun and funny was taken the wrong way. Man, I apologized. I have tried really hard to be especially polite and continue to try to be polite.
I really appreciate being able to partake of the conversation and being named I might just stay quiet in my shell.
I know. That is my embarrassing truth. I'm shy and sensitive and afraid of meanies.What a whoos I am.
On the other hand, I also was really unhappy about the snarking anons too. It wrecks it for the nice ones and it hurt the conversation.
At best, I can only hope that they cleaned up their act because Nathan is such a great teacher of the polite ethic.And this blog is a great conversation place.
I like the way Nathan runs the blog. I think he is very polite about administrative removal of comments and I think a lot of us have learned a great deal about manners on line here too.
As I said, I would miss my ability to be anon here and might not participate as much.I don't mind IDing myself personally in private rooms, but I worry about the www.
I have had a stalker and I could be googled right here with my name. As an anon, someone would have to know I come here and they wouldn't know which anon I am. I can e-mail people privately that I just was a certain anon.
But utltmately this is Nathan's blog. It's a gift to the writing community and fun and educational too.Whatever Nathan needs to do, I am for.His blog=he rules.
I don't allow any Anon posting on my blogs. I don't see why you allow it here. You have a billion people rushing to post on this blog as it is.
Anon posters can go troll on
4Chan.
I say remove the anonymous posting.
Think of it this way, if you were a published author doing a TV interview or one for a magazine, newsletter, whatever, and asked to give an opinion on certain subjects, you would think about your response. If you were smart.
You should be doing the same on a blog. These blogs can help a writer to pose a response and own it, proudly, to debate carefully, and professionally, to be open to the other point of view, rather than giving an immediate and off the cuff answer.
If the subject is so sensitive, and your honest response would reflect poorly on you, it's quite simple, don't respond. Just as you wouldn't call a TV interviewer an a** neither should you on a blog. And if you do goof up, as we've all done, you simply apologize, retract your statement and say, "Ya know what, after deliberating this, I agree with you."
I like to post anon because I don't want every comment I make indexed by Google.
Maybe you could have a sub-blog for Anons Only where the Real Opinions are spouted, then keep the main blog for the "sterile business-card" types, as the above anon pointed out.
There is some truth to that. It does get old after a while seeing the endless stream of "I agree" gushing forth after some established industry autor or agent posts. Remove the name recognition and see how many still rush to agree…
I agree with closing anonymous postings as well. I don't know how much good it will do, I think people would probably just make up a name and post under that. There is no difference really.
I think in the end you have to accept there are trolls and delete them were appropriate. Or make all your comments have to be approved before they appear.
If I can't post anonymously, I don't post at all. It's not that I'm rude and I certainly don't spam. Frankly, it's a privacy issue. Who I am is no one's business unless I choose to make it so. I'm interested in sharing my opinion, not my name, where I live, or anything else about me. The rest of it is irrelevant.
If someone posts anonymously and indulges in ad hominem attacks or other forms of interpersonal bad behavior, delete their posts. Otherwise, respect the fact that some people want to share what they think without having to share any more than that.
I would disallow anonymous comments altogether. If people absolutely need to express themselves without using their real names, they can always sign up for a pseudonym-driven blogger account.
I go anon because I've perfected my google ranking with my author web presence, and I don't want to clutter it up with random blog posts under my real name, which might even bump my more important reults down, if I posted too much.
When people search my name or books on the web, I want them to find the books, not my take on the inner workings of the industry–not because of what that take is, but because I don't want them distracted from going to the books.
I use my real name because I like having people know who I am and what I stand for:) Anyways, I'd delete on a case by case basis.
It's kind of interesting how many people think that the ONLY reason for posting anon is to "hide," when there's quite a few people on here with totally different (and valid) reasons for remaining anon. Some don't have a choice!
I vote for real name, keeping in mind that anyone can fake that with a Gmail account if they are really that desperate to remain anonymous.
Sometimes I think ANON comments are taken as rude even if they aren't meant to be. I know from personal experience I have had mine jumped on when they were intended to be innocent. So maybe you should put a stop to ANON if all of these people assume ANONS have nothing constructive to say anyway.
Personally I can't comment any other way, I'm blocked by the company I work for.
You get so many posts the moderation must be exhausting. And if it switches to fake names, you will still have to moderate those.
When you had the poll on how many writers, published … it seemed there were words unpleasant from people not anonymous as well.
Seems moderation will always be needed, with or with out the feature.
Very interesting topic Nathan. I'm sitting on the fence on this one so my post is pretty useless =D
Rick and Mira – you guys are hilarious!
Congratz on the BBAW award Nathan!
I post anon because it's quick and easy -I have never had the time to find out how to do it otherwise. I totally understand if anon function is turned off. I am an avid reader of this blog and will continue to do so.
thanks
I think it should be Nathan's decision alone as he is the one who has to read the rude comments from rude anons.
Here is my comments policy (on my own blog, that is), updated 1 March 2009:
"Comments should be signed. If a technical glitch forces you to post as an anonymous user, please include a signature, which may be a fictitious name to protect your privacy. I will hold your comment and release it for posting after I receive an email from you claiming the comment and containing your real name. Otherwise, I reserve the right to discard your comment after twenty-four hours."
I don't get many comments (one or two a month, compare to your hundreds a day). So I don't know whether such an administrative burden would be feasible for you. But if my policy is attractive to you, you may adopt it.
I don't like "anonymous" because of the way it impedes conversation. You have to start responding to "Anon 12:35" and don't know if "Anon 12:35" is the same as "Anon 12:42" or not.
If someone wants to remain anonymous, they can always give themselves some kind of false identity – "Cat Woman" or whatever.
But at least we would have an idea which comments come from the same source.
I agree that the professional writers will not want their real names that they publish under attached to anything not meant for sale.
So by disabling anon, you will lose some posts by established authors not wishing to pollute their google results with informal stuff.
However, as an agent, your target audience also includes aspiring writers, and most of them like to use their real names because they are seeking to get their names out their in any way they can.
So, as another anon pointed out–maybe split the blog into the Formal and Informal, where the pro's will end up going informal so as not to overuse their names with behind-the-scenes topics, and the aspirants can puff their chests in full login dress.
Guess which blog would get more traffic?
Some people work for corporations and don't want to risk their reputations. Some people work as freelancers and don't want to risk their reputations.
You're right that anon comments can be a waste, but some are good honest comments because people feel they can bare their true thoughts without any fear.
It depends on the site and the issues it covers. But even one that doesn't reel in controversy will have posts that can be piping hot.
I watch for the wasteful comments that add nothing and delete them. But of course, it's harder when you have 100 comments per post.
I also access this site through a work computer, like some other posters. This employer, we shall call him "the Gestapo" crawls over the logs on our computers. I always post anon on this blog and any other site I access while at work.
If anon was disabled, I would be relegated to lurker.
On the flip side, if the blog is absorbing tons of spam posts then it is the only option.
I don't think we should fear rudeness and inappropriate comments. The bottom line is, if those comments are made, someone really feels that way. How can letting somebody express their honest opinion be bad bad thing?
Yep. Anon 3:09 nailed it.
Split the blog. The "Here-I-Am's" vs. the "I'm-only-here-for-informal-discussion's".
anon@3:09-
Let me first say that I remain undecided about the broader question.
But you're evincing the kind of attitude (e.g. suggesting that all or most of the people who post under their own name are puffing out their chest) that I think is influenced by the fact that you're allowed to post anonymously. Would you be carelessly generalizing and have an attitude like that if it could come back on you? I doubt it. That's the kind of tone that I find unfortunate and detrimental to good discussion.
Christy- "Anon posters can go troll on 4Chan." I thought of that earlier! 🙂
I wanted to add that I use the Name/URL for commenting. I do this for a couple of reasons. My Google acct is attached to my personal email address that I DON'T want out there. I think I have an old Blogger acct floating around, but my blog is WordPress so I never use Blogger. I suppose I could use Open ID, but I think that too goes back to my old WordPress site since my new blog is on my individual home page.
All that to say… I hope you don't lose the Name/URL! 🙂 I don't intend to be anon. It still goes to my site and I use my name.
(Nathan, can you clarify if it is even true that this option would be gone as well?)
I always comment under my Blogger ID. But as an act of solidarity, today I'm signed in as Anon. 🙂
There may be the odd bad apple, but it seems most have a reason for remaining anon.
"I don't think we should fear rudeness and inappropriate comments. The bottom line is, if those comments are made, someone really feels that way."
Excellent point. Life isn't a filtered experience. Why create one here? I WANT to see the rants. if all you want is a canned how-do-I-get-published webinar, there are plenty of places to get that.
I find it curious that the two "pros" in favor of some sort of pro-only section the have some trouble with apostrophe usage.
Also it's not happening.
I allow anonymous comments on my blog. I haven't had any unpleasantness, at least, not since my old gran lost her internet access 🙂
I do sometimes have technical problems when trying to post a comment on a non-lj blog, so on occasion, I've posted anonymously, though I always give my name.
Definitely have comments by real names. It's all too easy to give hateful, 'in bad taste' comments when one is 'anonymous'. It's high time folks stood behind their comments, pro or con, without hiding behind a shroud of anonymity. If one feels that strongly about an issue, step up to the plate.
I'd close Anonymous commenting. People who want to comment but for professional or other reasons don't want to use their real name could simply use the "Name" choice – and they could type in whatever name they chose to use, right?
I allow Anonymous comments on my blog, but I also approve or disapprove them before they post. Which isn't feasible for a blog receiving this many comments.
Ha-
And of course when I make a punctuation joke I have a glaring typo.
Whatever I say is my responsibility. I take full credit for it and thus sign my name. If I ever write anything rude, then it my responsibility to apoligize.
Unfortunatly a lot of people don't take responsibility for their actions. I say sign your name.
re: 3:09, I don't know, Nathan. It's just an opinion. People can agree or disagree. Why censor?
Do not fear the words, people. Learn to understand what they mean!
I comment rarely, but if I do, I do so anonymously. I'd like to say, too, that it's a matter of choice. I'm tech savvy enough to set up a google account, even two or three, and I'm creative enough to come up with a pen name. I've got a few already.
But even a fake persona takes on a life of its own, and I don't want it. This is why I enjoy the anon function. I don't comment on blogs where I can't use this function.
As for guidelines for deleting comments:
1) spam
2) comments that are disrespectful against a person (as in downright insulting)
3) COMMENTS IN CAPITALS!
4) longish rants that veer considerably from the point under discussion
should be deleted. And ignored by everybody else.
Arrrgh, the word verification is weepo. I do hope that's not me.
Just read the comment that an agent/editor wrote about contributing to your blog as anonymous. I have to agree that professionals probably want to remain incognito, so I suggest anonymous remain, but with your editorial hand over it.
"People who want to comment but for professional or other reasons don't want to use their real name could simply use the "Name" choice – and they could type in whatever name they chose to use, right?"
Good point.
~butt
Re: Anon 3:09
Nathan, as a relatively consistent commenter, I'll admit that I DO indeed comment to try and get traffic over to my blog or to try and get "noticed" in any way I can. So, "puffing out my chest", while a generalization, is at least accurate in my case, and I honestly think a lot of people here are the same way. That's the business side of this, as I see it.
anon-
It wasn't so much an opinion as questioning the integrity of the people who are commenting using their real name, which is pretty objectionable. And it's the type of blithe disregard for the people that they're criticizing that is brought out of some people when they post anonymously.
Not all opinions are created equal, especially not when someone is hiding behind a cloak of anonymity to say something objectionable.
anon@3:29-
I'm not so naive to think that everyone who comments here is doing so from the pure goodness of their heart. But I don't think everyone should be lumped into one category.
Tris – thanks. 🙂
So, I was curious to see what all the options were. I went to my blog and tested it out.
And yes, if anonymous posting is closed, Name/Url is also closed.
The options will be Google or Open ID.
This is a fascinating discussion.
I believe strongly that if you have something you wish to say, your name should go with it. The only reason for "anonymous"is to hide the name of the author — this has resulted in the most appalling abuse on the internet and in the newspapers that permit (encourage?) an exchange of abuse.
To a blog of this kind. I'm sure we're all hoping for intelligent and meaningful input, to justify the time and efforts that Nathan puts into it himself.
I figure if you wouldn't say it with your name signed to it, then you probably shouldn't say it.
Get rid of anonymous comments, it encourages trolls.
Being a Gemini, I see both sides of this quite well. And after skimming the comments have found muself wavering back and forth as each poster has made their case. I don't care for the anonymous cloak myself, but it feels like a minor quibble in the midst of the blogging nation. Most important is the ability to swoop down and eliminate offending and trolling comments that the cowards leave behind.
I'm new to the computer/been writing/raising children/grandchilren and too poor to acquire a notebook. I'm also not a good typist so my five blogs are filled with typos. I have anon comments and real avatars of people joining who are unworthy /but who am I to say that a porn star can't read my shit. Anon is okay and I am finding myself taking the opportunity to writa all over the place/anyone's blog. I'm a real poetry reader and I just want to stay out of the bayou. Francy Stoller
I don't like the Anonymous option because if there's more than one signing that way I don't know if it's the same person or if someone else is chiming in. Anyone's name could be fictional but at least I can keep their comments straight. So I vote get rid of the Anonimousies…
Nathan,
Whether we should be or not, don't you think that people here are afraid to disagree with you?
I'm sure some people are, but I think it's misguided. Regulars disagree with me when they disagree and agree when they agree.
It's not like I have some blacklist for people who cross me, nor do I want this space to be a place for lockstep agreement.
I don't bite, really.
What "Next" said. Anonymity has its uses.
Have we become a nation of sissies who need to be "moderated" lest someone becomes offended?!
Newsflash: there are differing points of view in this world.
I hardly think generalizing the "chest-puffers" as anon 3:09 did warrants a protective attitude. This is a community of writers, and writers, by the very nature of their profession, will be subject to a heck of a lot more pointed criticism than that.
So I vote for keeping the Anon feature. Any posts that are ridiculously offensive (e.g. contain profanity or racial slurs, or spam, can be deleted, anon or otherwise).
anon@4:00-
Thank you for illustrating the type of comment that will be deleted even if I retain anonymous comments. I'll leave that up there as an example.
I would not allow anonymous posting hereafter. People are too enamored of their own words and too many succumb to their baser selves behind the cloak of cyberspace.
And to further clarify, even if a comment isn't vulgar or attacking anyone in particular per se, I think there's a mean-spirited tone (e.g. anon@4:00) to some anonymous comments that just isn't really conducive to a discussion. Reducing people's good faith opinions to being indicative of a "nation of sissies" really isn't helping anything.
I think I'm basically arriving at the opinion that I'm going to leave anonymous commenting for now for the very good reasons that others have mentioned (professionals, work computer issues, laziness). But I'm going to be holding anonymous commenters to a higher standard that I hold people who post using their own name or a handle. If I feel like they're using it to espouse an attitude or attack that I don't think they'd have if they had to sign their name I'm going to delete. And I reserve the right to change my mind.
This has been a really interesting discussion, and thanks so much to everyone for weighing in.
I have strong feelings about this.
I once wrote an impulsive, anonymous, narrative rant on a public site. It made its way around the blogosphere ultimately resulting in a reporter requesting an interview. Said reporter (aka Satan) claimed that the 'story' was in my humor and the resulting web resonance; however, his article took comments out of context and portrayed me as someone I am not. (For the most part.) The AP picked it up and before I knew it, I was contacted from international media. (Thankfully, about ten minutes later, I was yesterday's news.)
In the meantime, hundreds of people posted comments about what an asshole I was. Now when my name is googled, there are pages and pages of venom. I am (or- I was) by no means, a public figure. Now, I have to be very careful about what I say 'publically’. Meaning, I don't say anything publically anymore.
My feeling is this: keep anonymous posting, but delete anyone who attacks one's personhood (as opposed to one's ideas.) Otherwise, I’m back to lurking.
Oh yeah, and I personally don't think anon 4:00 was out of line …for whatever it's worth.
I apologize for all the anon irresponsible comments on your blog. If commenter's choose anonymity over identity then stupidity reigns. A knight's shield must fall if he's to romance a prospective lover. Restrict anons.
In defense of anon 3:09, several people here are generalizing about anonymous commentors, and they are not getting picked on the way he/she is for generalizing about the blog visitors.
Hypothesis: If the anon feature was removed from Nathan’s blog, then everyone would be more responsible for their words.
Argument: First, it is virtually impossible to force anyone in cyberspace to use real, legal names. Rarely do I use my real name for safety reasons. There are just too many gremlins lurking around in cyberspace. But, I do choose a name and stick with it throughout any blog or forum I choose to participate.
Second, human beings need familiarity. When we choose a name, we should own up to our words by growing, learning, and even in bantering over controversial topics, control what we say. It is the adult thing to do. Being honest is not synonymous with being rude. When I come here and only lurk, I like to connect the names to the comments. It feels like getting to know someone.
Third, if the only way a blogger can respond is by using a company computer on company time, maybe they should reconsider personal work ethics. If work allows such usage, but the person wishes to remain untraceable, then pseudo-names can be used, but consistently. This also makes is easier to respond to responses within the blog instead of the anon @ (time). Names are sweet to the ears and the eyes; people like hearing their own names.
Conclusion: Yes, remove the anon option. All message forums I participate in require registration and no anonymous responses are permitted. It does keep it tidy and clean. But, this is never fail-safe because there will always be one who will use a fictitious name, plant a bomb, and then run and hide (but not too far away, they will lurk to watch the results).
Anon 4:00
LOL omg
Nathan,
I really think that should be all up to you. I personally don't feel one way or the other. Maybe it's because I always sign in? I don't know? It does give people a way to post who don't take the time to create an account. People are always going to say rude things when they feel jaded. It's human nature… I'd just let it all slide off my back personally. Either way I'm cool with it. You choose. I'll support whatever the outcome.
I would prefer that everyone comment with their names. I don't use anonymous so why should anyone else? I do think that if someone says something against what the masses believe and that person doesn't have the ability to use anonymous, they could be a target. So even though I prefer for everyone to be public about who they are I know in this world the function should be kept. Sad!
I'm risking an overgeneralization here, too, because I can't possibly know the best intentions of some who comment anonymously. But I have to heartily agree that signing your name requires that you measure your words, and I don't see how that restriction hurts anyone. If you're afraid to say it online without damaging your career or reputation, then why say it? On the other hand, if it desperately needs said, then own up to it and take the repercussions. You may actually feel better for it.
I think living rooms are still the best place for informal discussion. And as an agented writer, I just don't understand the problem with commenting respectfully on another agent's blog. I thought we were supposed to contribute to the writing community.
I think you might as well leave anon as an option – of course I post under my real name so what do I care? 🙂
Honestly though, if you post under the name Jennifer (no offense to any Jennifers, I just picked the name) that really doesn't identify you. You might as well be anonymous. Likewise you can post as Abe Lincoln and I have no clue if that is your name, your husband's name, you neighbor's name or heck, maybe even the president's name.
If I post as Barak Obama tomorrow, chances are you will all assume it's not really 'him'. Why then do we assume anyone here is who they say they are – more to the point what difference does it make?
OMG!!! What is Nathan isn't Nathan?
Maybe tomorrow's blog post can be about our conspiracy theories as to the identity of this 'Nathan Bransford' person.
Really, though, what is the difference between 'Anonymous' and 'Mickey Mouse'?
I am not that tech savvy, but it seems to me there are some blogs where to comment, you have to put a real e-mail. It is Not published, but it keeps people in sight of the administrator anyway.
Just a thought.
I've been reading & thinking about this anon issue.
1) you mention one person who made really obnoxious comments; if you go the non-anon route you are, in essence, allowing her/him to dictate the terms of your blog;
2) I read your blog regularly & "know" the regular posters/names but, really, I know nothing about them, nor do I care to; a photo, an i.d., it's a very illusory sort of accountability;
3) this maybe my perception but the regular posters comments tend to have a performative element .. they are trying to get NB's attention and, consequently, I tend to gloss over their comments. The flip side of obnoxiousness is being on "good" behavior which doesn't necessarily lead to an interesting comment thread.
4) I've read your blog long enough & rarely – once? – have seen something I thought, "Oh, no they didn't." But that's the thing about being human, we all have our weird little quircks that come out wherever.
5) philosophically, deleting the anon OPTION (and, many people here chose not to use it, as evidenced by the many i.d.'ed comments), tightens the discourse; what is, ideally, a forum for the exchange of ideas and thoughts trends towards yet another narrow, not very interesting destination.
It would be akin to – I know, having lived there for several years – living in S.F. and dealing with if not personally then at least observationally, people the world over might think weird or odd. In real life, I would never dream of asking them to "contain" themselves, smooth out the edges. And there's a bit of that in this 'delete the anon' option rhetoric I'm reading. Isn't the world boring enough without censoring every little thing?
I remain, proudly – and politely – anon.
anon@4:13-
That's a fair point, but I think it's pretty clear I'm biased. I really like and respect most of the anonymous comments, but I've just gotten to be wary of them.
Whoever would all you out-and-proud blogger users bash if you didn't have the anons? You're always looking for someone or something to pounce on.
The blanket statements like "Anons are losers who can't stand by what they say" or "Anons are all trolls" are really astonishing. Bottle the rage, folks. Geez. Lynching is so retro…
This is a bit off topic, so delete it you must, but when did "generalization" become a dirty word?
Generalizing is a highly useful skill.
One day, you are walking through the fores when a large cat drops from a tree and begins to circle you. You are not a big cat expert, and have no idea if it's a mountain lion, a leopard, or a siberian mountain cat. But you can safely deduce, from your *generalizations* about big cats–(they're predators, they eat meat, they can attack people, they are very fast and strong, etc.)–hat you best not mess with it and calmly put distance between yourself and the cat while monitoring its behavior.
So, generalizing is not always a dirty word.
If having an opinion, any opinion, was always okay as long as it was expressed reasonably, then why do we vote anonymously in our national elections? There are outside pressures that try to influence people, and staying anonymous sometimes allows us to be honest without getting personally injured. Living in Los Angeles, I can tell you that a lot of Republicans don't feel like they can speak their mind. If they weren't allowed to vote anonymously, they probably wouldn't vote at all, and a portion of the country would be silenced. (I'm not Republican, BTW.)
Everyone has a right to their own opinion, you shouldn't have to be anonymous about it. If you're not willing to acknowledge what you've written, then maybe you shouldn't be writing it 🙂
What I would really like is an option where a person can post as "anonymous" so many times and then must create an account and sign in. It makes sense to get one's feet wet with anon comments, or even to use them every once in a while for privacy, but the free range aspect of it can lead to abuse. Then again, in general, I'm not one to advocate for more governance, so what am I talking about??
anon-
Well, one thing I do know is that this blog definitely isn't a democracy.
Nathan,
Fair enough. No, this isn't a democracy. That's okay. Then, you tell us. What do YOU want out of comments? What is useful to YOU?
Thoreau said something like…"A friend is someone you can think out loud with."
It is a favorite quote of mine.
It is a reason why I comment and read comments here.I love to think out loud with friends.
The anonymous question, both for and against, therefore, may be:
Are we in the company of friends or foes?
On the internet, this is probably one of the best monitored sites out there, but still, an occasional foe lasts a few moments on the blog before Nathan removes their fifteen minutes of fame.
And the friends who faux pas, get to save face and say a little quiet whoops, grow from their mistake, and nod a thank you to Nathan for not embarrassing them in front of the world from behind that curtain.
anon@4:30
I want what's best for an open and positive discussion, so everyone can feel comfortable registering their opinion. I'm also mindful that preserving anonymity probably results in more open and free-ranging discussion, which is why I'll probably leave the option open for now.
But as I think is clear, I don't think anonymity is uniformly positive when it comes to fostering an open discussion, and so I'm trying to strike some sort of balance between allowing people to state their peace and drawing the line on bad behavior.
I would go ahead and deny anonymity. You won't lose this reader.
That should have said state their "piece" and I weep for my comma usage. Although people should feel free to speak their peace also if they feel so inclined.
I didn't think Anon at 4pm was over the line either, which I wouldn't say if I couldn't post anonymously – given I now know your position.
Up until now, I never thought you were talking to me, but, if the Anon4:00’s tone was out of line, then I have been out of line, too. I guess I didn’t know where the line was drawn.
Based on this discovery, I promise not to comment as anonymous henceforth, and I apologize for misconstruing the dialog in the past as lively banter.
I definitely would appreciate a code of conduct posting. I hate to be dense, but I must be missing it.
Before I could afford to upgrade my Mac OS software and, therefore, my browser, I could only use the anonymous feature if I wished to comment.
Also, there have been recent trade blogs where some editors and agents admit they troll the 'net to see what kind of person an author is before they sign up him/her up.
I'm suicidal enough to speak my mind under my real name, but most authors aren't.
P.S. I get that you can't tell tone many times, and when people are posting anonymously, it's easy to assume they are being snarky.
I was not being snarky at 4:36.
Anon 4:00 with "nation of sissies" is outta line?
Whoa, you guys should watch Glen Beck or basically any cable news talk show! Anon 4:00 is a snoozer compared to that stuff!
This is very interesting. May I ask a question of Nathan and any others in favor getting rid of anonymous comments?
How do you feel about writers publishing under a pseudonym?
I may have been too quick on the trigger with anon@4:00. Still, I think partly this is a result of the anon thing. It's harder to read tone.
Although the day the comments section resembles cable news is the say I light myself on fire.
Speaking of Glenn Beck, I read that he is 1 of a handful of authors to have hit the NYT #1 spot with both fiction and non-fic.
So, being offensive sells! Being conformist imps does nothing for you!
I thinking banning anonymous comments is a good idea. If your idea/comment is important enough, then you should be willing to put your name to it. The anonymous tag, while possibly protecting our online integrity as writers, is ultimately a cowardly tool. If nothing else, a ban would (hopefully) make people think twice before they fire off a comment.
How difficult can it be to make up an identity? At least your butt is in on the line if you have one that tracks back to you.
There's a crude old saying: (will this get me banned?) "opinions are like butt-holes … everybody's got one."
The thing is, have the courage to stand behind your comment. Anyone can be anon. Anyone. That's absolutely, positively one of the very worst things about the explosion of online blogging.
Before anonymous comments are banned, as they might be, I will make one myself.
Why does this have to be a town hall meeting? It's your blog, Nathan, and you have your purposes and goals for it. Banning anonymous comments will probably reduce the number of industry professionals who make the few but insightful kind of comments that only they can make. If you want to keep that as part of the blog's purpose, then don't ban.
If that's not an important part, but a civil comment atmosphere is, then banning makes sense.
But of course you know this, and have your other reasons for or against, too. Like I said, it's up to you, not your readers.
I vote for everyone using their name. When you are anonymous, you don't have to think about what you say. I am in favor of people thinking about what they say. That way, they can still say what they want to say, I have no problem with people having differing opinions, but they are more likely to form their statement in a way that contributes to the conversation.
oh, yeah. forgot to mention that if I see a comment left by "anonymous," I skip it.
I prefer posting as myself (makes it feel more like real people chatting around the water cooler) but I don't mind the anons, whatever they say. It can be fascinating to see into the uncensored human psyche. If I really don't like it, I tune it out; I'm good at ignoring anything I don't like.
The anonymati have spoken!
I've been watching an interesting scene unfold lately on another blog wherein an argumentative type who was probably anonymous previously has come out and started using a "real" name. I honestly can't say that it's an improvement. If anything, it only makes the argument and rudeness more personal.
Granted, you'd probably have fewer trolls by disabling anonymous comments, but I'm not sure how much you'd gain by it.
My suggestion: Officially disable anonymous comments for a month, and then take another poll. Hey, a blog is a social experiment, right?
Wordver: foongeno
I dunno, but it sounds sort of like a fungus humongous among-us. 😉
Agree with several other anons that have commented (4.00, 4.23, 4.36 etc.)
Nathan, you said that 4.00's comment was inappropriate because their attitude was snide toward people who post un-anonymously, but don't you think the same could be said of un-anonymous posters too? A lot of the comments by them have been pretty condescending toward us, implying we're cowards and so forth. Not to mention by you, too, implying we're rude just because we have a different opinion. Personally I don't care what someone says about me on the internet, but I just don't understand how you can justify that it's okay for one side to do one thing and wrong for the other side to do the same.
BTW, someone said something about how writers should be able to deal with criticism and negativity before, and I agree. Have you ever read Amazon reviews? Some of them are pretty harsh and hurtful, and probably a bit uncalled for. But don't you think as an author you'd grow so much more if you accepted and gave thought to those nasty reviews rather than just soaking up praise all the time?
Anon 4:36.
Me too. I thought the offenders were other people, but now, I'm not so sure. For example, I occasionally swear to make a point, and usually the point I am trying to make is that I am f***ing hilarious. Still, if I make people laugh (even if it's only my spouse) who gives a s***?
And no, I can't sign my name… because in this google age, I'll be burned at the stake.
Further, and this may sound crazy, but it's the god's honest … I feel 'anonymous' has more integrity than a made up name.
That said, I now only answer to Nikkita.
I'm just saying.
To name or not to name is neither here nor there. The reason I think this is because I’ve read rude(ish) comments from anon and named bloggers. Several months ago, I responded to a question on this blog. I thought I gave a thoughtful response to a guy who wanted book recommendations within a specific genre. Because I mentioned an author that I met (once upon a time), several mocking comments from one blogger (who I’ll keep anonymous) followed my comment. She posted under her name and URL. Quite ballsy (can I say that?). That experience left me gun shy to post further comments. It was the first time I felt something akin to schoolyard bullying. Anyway, point being: some folks will say what is on their minds no matter which name is attached to the comments. So, my vote goes to Nathan Bransford, THE CENSOR.
anon@5:15-
I hold anon commenters to a higher standard for a variety of reasons: 1) with less context is less easy to read tone, 2) the comments tend to be more extreme, and 3) I'm sorry, but anons' track record around the Internet isn't so great. So yeah, I may single out someone who is anon, whereas I might not with someone who is named who writes an equally questionable post.
I also don't really see how anons can feel particularly aggrieved or personally attacked when no one even has even the slightest idea who they are.
With great power goes great responsibility. I think the solution here is that I continue to allow anonymous comments, but I'm going to unabashedly hold them to a different standard.
My personal philosophy on life is to have courage in my convictions or be silent. One should have the confidence to express a view even when others will disagree with it. I am therefore disinclined towards anonymous postings. As Dorine, Lucinda and others say, we need to take responsibility for our words and actions and not hide behind a cloak of anonymity – if your words are so offensive, irresponsible, and/or defamatory that you cannot apply your name to them, then perhaps think twice before writing or speaking. On the other hand I appreciate that some people have legitimate reasons for needing to remain anonymous, and so I would suggest that the current policy of censoring those that abuse this privilege be removed so that others are not disenfranchised.
I understand why some folks might choose anonymity responsibly for very good reasons.
Is there an option to force commenters to apply for an anonymous posting? That way, it will be more work to post anonymously and might deter the trolls.
anon@4:56-
I opened it up because I hadn't made up my mind and wanted feedback — it's been extremely helpful.
I comment under my real name unless I am commenting on one of my friends' websites and I don't feel like signing in… but then I say who I am! ha ha
Cynthia
http://www.clmoyer.com
This is a very intriguing conversation. I have NO idea if there really is a right or wrong. But there is,at least, a learning curve on what is polite or impolite. Hopefully, we are all learning.
I will say that, even using a handle, it was upon being ripped to shreds by others about my entry during a contest here (using a handle even) that I decided that the safest way to continue would have to be completely anon and was the way for me to go.
Maybe I have a lot to learn as a writer, but I am just not willing to present myself for target practice either.
To his credit, Nathan did not tolerate the author dissing in that contest either. None the less, it still stung.
Nathan,
Thanks for your honesty. I can understand where you're coming from now.
You're right, as an anonymous user 'attacks' don't have the same impact for me as they might for someone else. But as Robyn Campbell said, if someone says something against what the masses believe then they're going to end up targeted. In that situation, don't you think it's fairer for them to have the advantage of anonymity where they have the disadvantage of numbers?
If it ever got to the stage of anonymous people outweighing un-anonymous (or even equalling), that would be a problem. But on this blog at least, for every one anonymous commenter there's about 200 non-anonymous ones. I don't see how it could ever really be an issue.
PS- I'm Anon 5.15.
IMHO, people love making asses of themselves online & anonymity makes it that much easier. But if your post isn't worth signing even a fake name then maybe it doesn't need to be said at all.
Nathan, you've got a busy blog here I think you should make it easier on yourself and get rid of the anon feature. The trolls will just have to deal with it.
Congrats on winning the Best Publishing/Industry Blog at BBAW. I popped over immediately to see this Nathan Bransford fellow.
Although I realize many, many blog readers are even more anonymous than Anon – the dreaded Lurkers – I have steeled myself to the fact I may never 'meet' many of my blog readers. So I actually treasure the lurkers who de-lurk and comment as Anon.
anon@5:46-
Yeah, I'm fine if people want to espouse a point that might be unpopular anonymously as long as they do so respectfully.
I think what people confuse is that it's not the voicing of an unpopular opinion that I or others take issue with, it's the tone that opinion is raised with.
Just to take the anon@4:00 example, there's a difference between saying that people might be too sensitive vs. calling people sissies or whatever it was. I wouldn't have said a thing if anon said I or someone else was being too sensitive, but there's a way of expressing that opinion without being a jerk about it.
And the problem isn't so much personal attacks as much as the fact that when you're starting with a hostile comment, usually that discussion has nowhere to go but down.
Nathan,
Really? I don't think the conversation always has to go down. I think it depends on how you handle it. For example, I started out quite annoyed with all this- probably came across as hostile in my first comment, too- but the more I've heard from you the more I can understand your point of view. If you take the time to debate with someone and do it well I think it's much more beneficial than just straight-out agreement.
As for the tone thing, as you said earlier I think that's just a problem in general with the internet- it's too hard to tell whether someone is joking or being plain nasty.
(anon 5.15/5.46)
I used anon signatures when I first started commenting on blogs. Pure nerves! I'm shy and find it difficult to put myself forward. It took me months of lurking to dredge up the courage to comment, even anonymously.
I therefore think anon serves an honest purpose. Unfortunately, there always seem to be a few who ruin things for everyone. There should always be an option for the powers who be on the blog to delete any comments he/she/they feel nasty or inappropriate. At least, in my opinion 🙂
To be fair, the anon 4:00 comment, to me, anyway, was so broadly aimed as to be unoffensive to any one individual, since s/he said: "…a NATION of sissies…" which implies that there is some greater problem of hyper-sensitivity and/or extreme political correctness infecting society at large, not just this blog.
That's how I took it, anyway, but it offended you, and it's your blog, so…
I think you get so many readers and comments that you can do whatever you want and it won't really matter. If you keep anon, there are so many replies to your posts that no one holds you responsible for them. If you make everyone have a google account and a picture of themselves, you'll still have a hundred replies a post.
My vote is to make everyone have a google account and sign in that way. It won't stop your readers, and it ultimately won't matter to the amount of replies you get per post.
I completely understand why you'd disable anonymous comments, but you would lose comments from people (most likely working writers, editors and other agents) who don't want to leave comments on sensitive subjects (former agents, contract issues, rotten clients, etc) that might be of interest to blog readers.
One alternative would be for such comments to come directly to you for posting as a comment under your name, with content anonymized as appropriate. But maybe that would be a PITA for you.
It's a balancing act and probably you're the only person who should decide what works for you.
anon@6:15-
Well, like I said earlier in the chain I was probably too quick on the trigger on that one. But I still think it was a little haughty, and I don't think a post has to necessarily be aimed at a specific individual in order to raise my ire or be considered unproductive. But that one may not have deserved to be singled out.
Anon 3:09 and 4:00 here, blogging away to the tune of Snoop Dogg (what's my m-f'n name?)…
nate Dogg, congrats on the best Blog award! I think it's well deserved. i spread my anonymati wisdom to all the agent blogs that get 1) get enough posts to make it worthwhile and 2) alalow anon comments (which aren't all that many), and yours consistently offers the most relevant content. Many of the others are caught up in the minutia of submissions and just aren't all that fun.
Anyway, I didn't intend my posts to be inciteful or controversial (I save the good stuff for the books, naturally), which just goes to show, it's all relative.
Kepp on keepin' on, my good man.
~butt
Nathan, as Vice President of a large research organization, I often get people coming in to complain about this or that person. One of the first questions I ask is if they've gone and talked directly with the subject of their complaint. Most times they have not. My next comment is don't say anything to me that you wouldn't say with them standing here. I don't want to hear character assassinations that border on the level of gossip.
Along those lines, if someone has something to say, but it's either rude, would make them look bad if you knew who they are, or if its personal, then it probably shouldn't be posted. If you can't sign your name, don't participate in the discussion, rather go chew on a nail until your frustrations dissipate or you get the chuzzpah up to tell us who you are.
Since I'm comment #256, no one will ever really read this, but I'd still like to say that I had to shut off anonymous comments (also known as "cowardly comments") due to one really nasty commentor on my own blog.
I'm still confused as to why someone would comment about something SO sensitive on a writing blog that they'd need to hide their identity. If it's that sensitive, maybe you shouldn't be putting it online?
I'd say no anonymity. If you want to hide your identity, create an account with a fake name and do it that way.
I don't think anonymous comments are necessary. If an individual doesn't want to use their real names they can use a handle and many do. Anonymous posts allow for people to say what they will and not be held accountable in anyway. If someone is using their real name they are at least accountable for what they write. If someone wishes to post something of a sensitive nature and not use their real name,there is the option of a handle. A handle also allows for anonymity while proving accountability.
Personally, I don't think you overreacted, Nathan. Skimming the comments now, I find anon 4:00 offensive and argumentative.
I am not a sissy, I just happen to prefer civil discourse. I have been in enough situations where one belligerent person made everyone else's lives miserable, that I'm sick and tired of it.
If you have to put other people down to make your point, chances are they won't listen to you anyway. All they are going to react to is the put-down.
I think that moderation of anonymous comments is not censorship; it is a public service. Of course people can be offensive under their own names, but it seems to happen more with the guise of anonymity.
Please, PLEASE, blog about apostrophes. It drives me crazy when people use them to make plurals!
Well, this is certainly eye-opening. I never realized that my comments are completely ignored simply because my name is typed in black text instead of blue. From reading the comments, though, it seems that's the case for many of you.
Personally, I don't really see the difference, but I guess I'll get a Blogger account.
It won't be used for anything other than comments, mind you, so you won't know anything more about me than before. But I guess I'll no longer be branded a coward.
I really don't like anonymous comments. I think it is cowardly and it does tend to make people behave in ways they wouldn't if their name was attached.
I've dealt with this issue personally. As a journalist, my stories end up both in print and online. If someone has a comment to the print version, they can write a letter to the editor but they have to include their name.
In the online version, they can post anonymously and I've gotten some pretty mean comments on restaurant reviews I've written (which could very well be written by the owner of the restaurant for all I know).
The loss of civility in our country is getting a pretty high coverage this week and I think you should delete comments that are cruel or off topic. There is nothing wrong with have a nice discussion without rants.
Gotta tell ya, this would be one boring thread without all the anons. Me thinketh that would extend to the blog in general would Anon posts to be banned. Then it becomes a preaching to the converted experience, awash in a sanitized sea of agreement. Yeck!
I do find it interesting that writers are generally thought of as anti-censorship folk, yet here the majority are in favor of it.
Why is that?
Sociology thesis, here I come…
This isn't banning HUCK FINN from the library, it's a moderated discussion on a blog.
To be fair to those who absolutely cannot post under their own name, and follow the eticate rules, I would have to say no, don't turn it off. There are some good reasons sometimes to post anonymously.
I would like to see some sort of signature at the bottom of an annon post. Something simple, like your initials, or even the screen name you prefer to post under so we can keep straight WHICH anon is saying what.
But if the anonymous is turned off, there's still the NAME/URL feature for those who do not want to comment as their real selves. As far as I can see, the NAME and anonymous features are basically the same anyway.
So yeah, shut off the anonymous and force commentors to take some responsibility for their posts. Even if it's only under a screen name.
………..dhole
I commented on this blog anonymously, partly because I'm paranoid and partly because I didn't have a Google account at the time. So it follows that now that I have one I'm fine with removing the anonymous option. But a while ago I would have been against it. I gotta say either way is fine…(helpful, I know…)
😀
The truth is that even if you sign your posts with a name, it can be fake. But I'd argue for taking out the anonymous function and if people want to comment, they at least have to use a name.
The things is, it's free and easy to make a blogger/OpenID account that uses a false name. So you can still be anonymous, but that way if you're consistently rude, people notice. It protects identity while still encouraging politeness (to an extent).
I used to not care about anonymous comments, but lately I've been noticing the same thing as you, Nathan. 95% of rude comments are made anonymously. And it seems like (though I could be wrong) over 50% of anonymous comments are rude.
That said, this is your blog. If you allow anonymous, it won't bother me.
You either have to ban the anon posts or delete ANY posts (not just those from anons)that are offensive. Well, now that I type that, you always have to delete the offensive posts anyway, even if anons were banned (some poeple I suspect would still post similar things under a name).
I'd say that having anons does increase the offensiveness factor overall, but it also ups the interesting factor as well as the total # of contributors. So it's a tough call. Depends what exactly your goals for the blog are.
:)Ash ~ Personally, I don't ignore comments written with a sig in black instead of blue. I just assume you don't have a webpage or don't want to share your profile with the whole planet. It took me a long time to take that risk, and I'm still not totally comfortable.
But at least I have a name to associate with you.
I've been thinking a little more about this whole "anonymous" thing, and why argumentative posts with no identifier are somehow more offensive than those with one.
I've come to the conclusion that it implies a lack of respect to the addressee(s). As in, "I don't have to identify myself to you. You aren't worth it." It seems like a mind game, to try to get the upper hand in the argument. It makes me feel like I'm in one of those movies where someone is trapped in a room, being taunted by disembodied voices.
However, the technique backfires because it actually implies that the poster isn't confident enough about what they have to say to identify themselves.
I have read quite a few comments here and on other blogs with which I strongly disagreed, but which were posted by people who identified themselves. I was willing to agree to disagree, or just ignore them, because I knew that they respected me – and themselves – enough to attach a name or profile to their words.
anon-
No, I think I'm comfortable holding anons to a different standard than those with blog identities and don't feel the need to be perfectly consistent about it. If people want to post anonymously, and have a good reason for doing so, they'll be able to add to the discussion. But if people are using an anon identity to be rude I'll delete it, and my threshold will be lower than it would be if they were posting under a consistent identity.
My two cents: I'd hate to see the irresponsible Anons ruin it for those who use it for legitimate purposes. I vote to keep it.
It amazes me when people think they are "censored" if they can't say anything they want in any venue they want.
First Amendment: Just because you're entitled to speak, doesn't mean I have to post your comments in my blog/newspaper/forum.
Vitriol and snark seem to have taken the place of reasoned arguments for some in the Blogging Wild West. If you can't make your argument without the personal attacks, then it's probably weak. We're writers after all – we should be able to do that much.
I'm glad Sheriff Bransford is willing to keep the peace so that we can have the constructive arguments that make this blog a great place to visit.
Nathan,
OK, I see. Well, that's fair, I guess. I mean, it's YOUR blog, so you do't have to be fair, right? Any Anon is free to go start their own blog and write whatever they want…
I vote to keep anonymous commenting. You can always turn it off if someone's abusing it, as you did before, but most of the time the bad stuff is a minor annoyance and the good stuff is worth having. And especially when the conversation is about something sensitive, I think it adds positively to the discussion when someone who has significant info but fears repercussions can post anonymously.
Angie
My two cents: Anonymous comments are frequently the voice of descent. Without them, I do think the flavor of your blog would change. Respectful debate is healthy, and I doubt you'd want your blog to feel Stepford Wife-ish.
On the other hand, I'm all for deleting the anonymous commenters whose only purpose is to be rude. As for those on the edge, don't let them get a rise out of you. That's what they want. Just ignore them, and eventually they'll get bored and leave on their own. Or, at least,one can hope.
I vote to allow people to keep their anonymity. I ALWAYS comment anonymously and I don’t believe I have ever said anything untoward (at least not deliberately). Why then don’t I sign my name? Well, to be honest I am a very private person (a rarity in an era where everyone is more interested in being known than in doing something worthy of being known about imo). Everything on the internet is there forever. I am not interested in people being able to google me and come up with a collection of images and information that allow them to profile me – to wit, to gain a false sense of familiarity. I am sure I am not alone – I think there are probably plenty of people who have interesting things to say and useful information to share who simply will not do so if the anonymous option is eliminated.
I second anon 8:29. It's no one's business what I think about what. That is confidential information. I wouldn't post if I had to have it associates with my name.
Privacy is priceless.
anons-
As others pointed out, you don't have to post with your name. Lots of people here post with a handle/pseudonym. But having a consistent identifier provides a lot of context.
Per the Nathan Bransford Blog Consistent Identifier Act of 2009, I will hereby sign all my anon posts.
Regards,
The Anonymizer
It's that easy, folks.
I know I've commented before, and I stand by that post, though it was before I read any of the comments. There was just so many.
Now, I'm better informed of the controversy.
I've read several comments from Anonymous posters about not deleting the anonymous feature because it is censorship, or because people are at work need to be able to comment without having their work place visible.
So, if you walked up to me at a conference, and I could see your face, you wouldn't say certain things to me (because I advertise my identify you know who I am at least) as you would if you were wearing a bag over your head? In that case, you would insult me because I could never identify you, and therefore it is ok for you to have your opinionated say no matter how hurtful it was?
Freedom of speech, you say, and I, as the victim of your abuse, must take it because I cannot identify you, and you are protected from any consequences of your actions. But if I could identify any feature of you, you would say only what you thought I wanted to hear?
There are several posters here who use the "name" feature but have no blog profile. Some of those persons I look for to see what their comments are. They are consistent with their voice, even if they do not publicly disclose their identity. There are also several commenters here in "blue" who have nothing on their blog profile. That doesn't change my opinion of them. I follow their voice – even (or especially) when it disagrees with mine – not the published profile. There are even people in here I look for and have never clicked on their profile.
But, the blog host can find these people if the need arises. I doubt the need arises often. But with the straight anonymous, it is harder to track them down and ask not to be "mean spirited" on the blog.
And when several "anonymous" posts show up in a row, who's to know that the anonymous poster is not just having a conversation with "itself" to seem even more anonymous. (Yeah, I followed that trail that Nathan wisely deleted, and I'm ashamed of myself for doing it. It's kinda like a traffic accident, you don't want to look, but can't help yourself.)
And if a person has to identify at least a psuedonym, at least the blog administrator doesn't have to block "all" such commenters, as there is a specific ID for the bad apple.
……….dhole
"And when several "anonymous" posts show up in a row, who's to know that the anonymous poster is not just having a conversation with "itself" to seem even more anonymous."
So what if they are? Who's to say some posters are not really experimental AI bots?
The Anonymizer
PS- I'm Anon 5.15.
And this is my main problem with "Anonymous" commenters. It's impossible to have a real conversation. There are too damned many of them. A consistent pen name is fine. I just want to have some continuity in the discussion.
I agree with Christine H. – there's an element of disrespect with a lot of folks who refuse to identify themselves (and just to be absolutely clear – I am NOT asking for your real name – just a name!).
Nathan-
Ignore the few bad apples. Honestly, I don't think getting rid of anon option would really help. People who are rude will be rude no matter what.
And, some people need the anonymous option. Maybe they are someone known to the public and don't want a whole bunch of stalkers. Maybe someone is addressing a delicate issue. Maybe…they just don't like giving out that kind of information. There are many reasons to sign anonymously and most people aren't doing it to attack anyone.
After all is said and done it's your decision and yours alone.
Excellent question. I know it may seem a bit hokey, but why not put one of those 'thumbs up or down' or rating functions on your blog? Democracy in action, you could stipulate that '3 consecutive thumbs down in 3 minutes'-or whatever-warrant removal. The details are up to you, but honestly, not sure if I agree speech should ever be muzzled unless all other options have been exhausted.
I have been going back through the past week's blogs trying to find the offensive postings that a couple posters mentioned earlier, and I have reached the following conclusion:
I did not find that the vast majority of the anonymous comments were rude or disrespectful in any way when I read them as an outsider – I knew they were not directed at me, personally. After all, I am Anonymous.
However, I think many of the posters forget that their postings appear to be directed at particular people, when that may not have been their intent at all. And others, perhaps like me, have stoked the fire in well intentioned fun.
I honestly thought that yours and mine back-and-forth was received in good humor on both sides. Unfortunately, I now realize that though I left the blog smiling, you may have been seething. After reviewing some of the comments you made after my posting, I realize you may have mistook what I thought was a fun discussion and perhaps took it far more personally than I intended. For that, I apologize.
I also can see where one or two of my comments were indeed rude. If you and I had been sitting down having a conversation together, I may have made the same points, but I would have said them more kindly. I certainly would have been more conscientious that we were talking in public, and I would have been more careful not to possibly embarrass you or put you in a difficult situation.
On the one hand, the internet gives us a false sense of familiarity with each other, and on the other hand, we sometimes forget we are talking to real, live people. We can also forget that we are not talking in private. That may not be an excuse for rudeness, but it is an explanation as to why we can sometimes forget that we are being rude. And yes, being anonymous made it easier for me to forget. I should log in.
In summary, I have made what I believe some people on this blog would consider inflammatory comments because I did not understand the culture of your blog, and I thought a wide range of debate about writing, publishing, and assorted issues was encouraged. I am not saying you don’t want witty debate, I am saying that I was more gritty (for lack of a better word) than is probably appropriate for this site.
I also realize that though I used anonymouse to be more controversial, I should remember that I am also talking to real people. Lesson learned. Thank goodness, I learned it anonymously. ;0)
We get so few parades in our lives, and I am genuinely sorry if I have rained on your parade in any way.
This is the internet and I feel you should use a name. Anonymous should be banned. Your user name does not even have to be your real name or your pen name. It is just your handle for that site you are commenting on.
I unfortunately have to use many different names due to the things I do. Yes, sadly I play computer games and I then have to join guild sites with whatever character name I joined the guild as.
So long story short here … banning Anonymous would be a good thing but I doubt it will get rid of the comments. They will find other ways I'm sure. There always has to be a bad apple in the mix.
I guess this blog is only for delicate newb writers who can't stand to have their feelers hurt.
The anon thing boggles my mind. I have commented before under the name/url option (sometimes with url, sometimes without) simply because I only had a blog profile for my children's writing and what I had to say was not appropriate for that blog. However, I always used the same name. Now I have an internet identity for my adult writing too. But, any trail you follow would lead to me without deception. I comment on EAs blog with my childrens' screen name and on the Shark's with my adult one. But, I have nothing to hide.
I think a major porblem with the world is society's unwillingness to take responsibility for itself. Once, people lived in tribes and depended on each other for survival. Then, they moved to towns, but everyone was still in the same boat. They shared fences and had to face each other in church. Then, travel became easy. If people really messed things up, they just moved, or went to the church or pub or whatever across town. Now, everyone spends more time on the internet than talking to their own families. They find like minded people and blow smoke up each other's rears. And, should they disagree, they just change profiles or sign anon. They harass each other and write scathing reviews (in some cases without even reading the work), and gossip, and well…
Not to say it's al of you by any stretch of the imagination. I just wish there were more accountability on the web.And, really, if you want to engage in a debate without compromising a web profile, you can pick name/ url and stick to one name. Kind of like letters to the editor are often signed.
It's your blog, you gotta do what you want.
As an infrequent commenter on your blog I would urge you to leave the anon option open.
It seems to me that this is a forum where you have placed a value on discussion, transparency and truth. Sometimes you can't have all of that in the same place unless people are allowed to speak freely – and being anonymous allows for free speaking.
Occasionally I visit a site where I need to make a contradictory or unpopular or sensitive statement, and I don't want it to be personal. I don't want the negativity to follow me back to my page. I don't want to seem disrespectful to an author I respect. So I choose to go anonymous. Not to bash, not to troll, but to put a statement out there that needs to be said, even if it doesn't fall on the happy side of nice.
In those situations, if I can't make the statement anonymously, I won't make it. And the discussion loses some depth or layering from which it would have benefited. Perhaps something that everyone was thinking but no one had the balls to say.
Then again, I've been on the net forever, and know better than to put my real name on anything. The Internet is forever, dudes. So this is a pen name, and none of my e-mail addresses have my full name on them. *shrug*
If someone wants to be nasty, they don't need an anon tag to hide behind. Creating a web persona is as easy as gmail.com.
I'd say close anonymous comments. If someone has something truly worthwhile to post but needs their anonymity to protect themselves they can always message you and you can repost it if you think it worthy.
If anyone has some troll drool they can be a man, er… grown-up troll, and stand by their own name.
(Like Hrorgath the Inimitable)
I imagine many people will regret splashing their real names on the web in the future, when their thoughts and information are used against them in ways they could never foresee.
Be careful. Nothing is what it seems.
Well, Nathan, if someone hasn't got the guts to own up to what he or she said, they have no right in saying it.
It seems to me that overall today´s discussion was enriched by the anons.
Just so darn annoying, especially in a discussion as interesting as today´s, when there´s too many of them and you have a hard time following who´s who. That´s what´s not constructive.
I agree with Rick. Many companies frown from having their employees access blogs. I think we should allow the anonymous to make comments. But they must do so with courtesy and respect.
Anonymous 2:21 ~ We are writers, for God's sake! We are putting – or hoping to put – our real names and thoughts into print for the world to not just see, but pay money for.
If you can't put your name on a simple comment, how can you put your name on a whole book?
I've gotten in trouble plenty of times for things I've said in various personal and professional situations, but that is how you learn to handle yourself. If you overreact or offend someone, you apologize. Even if you think your point was correct, you still respond to the person's feelings out of respect for them. Then you try not to make the same mistake again. Simple as that. Over time, you learn what to say and what not to say. And some people will persecute you no matter what you do, so you have to ignore them.
BTW, the whole "Freedom of Speech" thing in the constitution is meant to protect political speech. It means you can't be thrown in jail for criticizing the government. It has nothing to do with social niceties.
My vote is to keep doing what you have been doing, Nathan. Allow anonymous posts, but monitor them.
"We are putting – or hoping to put – our real names and thoughts into print for the world to not just see, but pay money for.
If you can't put your name on a simple comment, how can you put your name on a whole book?"
This is precisely the point. Some of us will ONLY attach our names to writing we are paid for. I don't want blog posts cluttering up my author results on Google. The behind the scenes details of the industry are boring to most readers. I don't want them following my name to boring stuff.
I agree with Rick. Many companies frown from having their employees access blogs. I think we should allow the anonymous to make comments. But they must do so with courtesy and respect.
Oddly enough it’s a problem that arises from everyone believing their comments in general carry that much more worth than they actually do (yes I do have a slice of irony pie at my elbow).
See it works like this. The act of messageboarding itself is an arrogant, audacious act in its purest form: why do YOU believe that your thoughts and opinions have such worth that they deserve to be broadcasted in a public forum? Well, unless, if Stephen Fry then I suppose you’re justified. If someone stood up on a bus and proclaimed their mortification of the current market climate, you’d think of 1 word to describe that person and it wouldn’t be in a Christian phrasebook.
This inherent obscenity of this act is then tempered and watered down. Some people do it out of habit, some feel a guilty need to leave a note of thanks (these people will also, I presume, leave notes everywhere saying “was here, did nothing”), some leave humorous notes (humour is ALWAYS justified), some people leave messages in order to find likeminded people and build friends outside the message board (or leave “I loved this!” to which a friend relies “I loved this too!” and they both jump about and whoop like the worst sorority stereotype ever). But what remains is this sense of worth; you have taken the time to put your opinions on a page and that gives them value.
Wrong!
There are exceptions (like an expert correcting information or if you are, indeed, Stephen Fry) but they are very few. Honestly, how many training courses have you been to when you’re really not paying attention, just sifting through the same old drudge with half an ear just in case something juicy is said. Sound familiar? Writing on a message board is akin to leaving a note scrawled on a bus stop when no one is there. It’s worthless to anyone other than the writer and a handful of the millions of people who MIGHT read it.
What you post is the minimal of throw away comments because you can’t be sure if you even have an audience! You post because you feel a compulsion to, that’s it. There is no higher calling, no greater good, no external NEED for your comments. It is for purely selfish reasons. This entire post is for me (and the odd person who laughs at it! Humour, remember, is always valid) especially when you consider it will appear around 300th on the list of comments – who’s going to read down THAT FAR??
So why get so wound up when people say bad things, anonymous or otherwise. Their words have no more or less worth than everyone else’s, which is to say none. By defending your opinions, however vociferous or banal they may be, by becoming upset about another’s comments you are in fact giving them a worth they didn’t have before.
On the few occasions I cannot hold in the arrogance of broadcasting my thoughts, I always comment under my own name (Not that anyone does, or should, care), though I do try and keep it to jokes, scything or regular, rather than banal anecdotes or posts that begin “I think…”
So think about what you are doing and enjoy it for what it is, a self indulgent act. Treat is as such and the vitriol of other people, abusing what is there as a function for a fraction of people, will wash right past you.
Unless you’re Stephen Fry, then anything you think goes frankly.
Out of curiosity, I googled my name to see if comments come up as results. On the first five pages of results I got a ton of stuff that was not me. And none of it was comments.
If I google my whole name, I still get a ton of stuff that isn't me.
I tried another author and got his blog, and a bunch of stuff that wasn't him, and one comment that wasn't him.
So I don't think comments are really an issue. And you can use part of your name or even call yourself Piglet if you want to.
In allowing comments at all, you are trying to encourage a healthy and useful conversation. Enabling anonymous comments generally IMPROVES that conversation, by (1) allowing some people to write more honestly and freely than they might otherwise do, and (2) allowing additional people to contribute who might not write at all if they had to reveal their true identities.
In my case, I tend to post anonymously because the folks who sign my paychecks for my day job–the one that pays the mortgage and feeds the kids–would freak out if they knew about my after-hours work, and using my real name to post here and elsewhere is not a risk I can take. So unenabling the anonymous option would eliminate me from the conversation–not the community, at least not at first, but certainly as an active participant.
Andrew, I usually do read all the comments. Nathan reads all the comments.
I agree with you that people give unpleasant anonymous posters too much credit. If everyone ignored them, they would get bored and leave.
I have to disagree, however, that blog comments are basically worthless. I have learned so much from the discussions on this and other writing blogs. Words always have an impact of some kind. That is why language is effective, and why we write.
Training seminars… well that's another story. But I heard that Nathan's recent seminar was extremely informative. So I guess it depends on the seminar.
This is Nathan's space, and he should set the rules that guide how it is used to develop the desired atmosphere. Anon commenting or lack thereof in someone's own space doesn't bother me.
It's like removing your shoes when you visit someone's home or observing dress code in the office – as a polite citizen you comply with reasonable codes of conduct. If you don't like the codes of conduct, you don't visit the establishment. If you can't comply, you're asked to leave (ignored or deleted, as the case may be, in cyberspace).
The stronger opinions I have about the role of anon speech in public discourse are off topic to this question I'll save it for my own blogs 🙂
TGIF!
When anonymous posting is outlawed only outlaws will post anonymously!
The crazy will sound sane! The insecure will attack the innocent! Cats and dogs will intermingle, creating a new species called Cogs –or Dats! And they'll spawn Pitties or Kuppies or some other ungodly new life form to be exploited by late night pseudo-comedians Porn will be renamed pron…and people will accept the difference.
Crap.
Mrs. Letterman is having a snit. I have to go now.
This isn’t a comment about closing the blog to anonymous. That’s clearly ineffective.
I rarely read through all the comments on your blog, Nathan; you’re too popular. This time I did, because I was fascinated by the discussion on hurtful comments.
Are so many of us really this afraid of being insulted, or in your case, causing insult? When I find a comment offensive, it’s because, at some level, I resonate to the truth of it. I have been offended by comments in your blog; ones that I’m sure were not intended to be hurtful. They are the ones that helped me most in deciding whether writing was a good path for me and the kind of image I want to project as a writer.
Obviously, you can edit the comments as you wish, but I, for one, will miss the crunchy comments like 4:00’s.
My comment is too far down for anyone to read, but I'm going to post it anyway for the good of my mental health.
I read a lot of writing blogs/boards because keeping up with "what's going on" is part of my job.
Now, I know here some anonymous folks have gotten out of hand and I don't blame Nathan for not enjoying that. But in the time I've spent online, I've seen three people get seriously, seriously out of hand in Internet discussions — and none of the three did it with an "anonymous" take.
One guy used a consistent handle but always belittled anyone who disagreed with him. Then one of the people who disagreed with him did the unforgivable — she achieved success with her writing. So he stalked her. And I'm not talking about just said nanny-nanny-boo-boo things on a discussion board. I'm talking about probed her personal life and personal information and made veiled threats — because, you see, she was "finable."
Another guy used his real name …well, most of the time. He also belittled everyone who disagreed with him. Sadly I used my real name so he took disagreeing with me a little further and began posting…well, unpleasant things about me around the internet. For a while, any search on my name produced pages and pages of his ranting and made up theories about me. That was fun.
The third person also used a consistent "handle" though not her name. But apparently she was an editor. She got mad at another editor (he worked in a different area of publishing from her — not vanity publishing, either — real publishing and always posted using his real name). So she went to a new message board and posted "warnings" about him. Swell…now when you google her "real" name…her record looked clean but when you googled his…you get fake "warnings" based on her being annoyed with him. That's got to be good for the guy's career.
So, forcing handles doesn't cut nuttiness unless you're forcing real names. But using your real tracable name can backfire on you in a nasty way if you're not careful. If you accidentally prod the wrong person — character assassination seems to be quite the Internet "thing."
Jan, I appreciate what you are saying about the dangers of identifying yourself. I was unaware of this character assassination trend, so I'm glad you posted it.
Regarding the three incidents you mentioned, I agree that those were pretty horrible examples of abuse. But at least you had a consistent idea of which comments belonged to which poster, and didn't have to sit there wondering if the person doing the ranting was the same one who had posted politely a few minutes prior.
This also allows you to set the tone of the reply, or to choose to ignore certain posters.
Of course, people can create fake identities, too, and use them to exhibit split personalities. I've known it to happen, but at least you still had a consistent idea of which persona was attributed to which comments.
My vote is to keep the anon option.
One reason is that I can google my name and find comments I left on sites in the past that I have since changed positions on–I don't want to have to follow them all around and type a retraction.
I also agree that some professionals may feel less inclined to contribute if anon is not an option. Readers may feel that 2 minutes to set up an account isn't much, but if one is a busy author, publisher, editor, etc. and have a quick, helpful thought to add to the discussion, those 2 minutes make a huge difference.
Nathan this is your blog, so what do you want? Host rules.
Having dealt with rude commenters of my own in the past, I've found in general that people will say anything if they can hide behind anonymity. In fact, a model recently sued Google to find out the identity of the Blogger blogger who was trashing her on her blog. The name was ordered to be released and the model filed suit against her. Once the woman's name was made public, though, the model dropped the lawsuit. Point taken, I felt. If you're going to trash someone, be prepared to be publicly outed. I think it's GREAT.
See the Sept. 11 poat over at Read Roger (http://www.hbook.com/blog) for an example of a fascinating conversation that would not have been nearly as rich or interesting without anonymous comments from industry pros.
Our mothers always told us "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." That thought still applies, but it should be slightly reworded when it comes to a debate. "If you can't give your position nicely, and are not willing to own the words you speak, then don't say anything at all." If what you say could have negative repercussions for you or others, then it's best to keep it quiet, rather than speak potentially damaging words.
I normally post with my real name, but I'm throwing my vote in with the people who support leaving the anonymous comments on for the following reasons:
1. anonymous comments allow people to post from work, where they might not be allowed to sign in, even under bogus id. They also allow industry professionals, like other agents and editors, to add insight to the conversations.
2. I object to the idea that it's somehow cowardly to say something without putting your name on it. There are plenty of things that I disagree with and speak out about that I don't want to be linked to my name forever on the internet.
3. I agree that people's opinions should be expressed respectfully, but requiring names (when, as people have pointed out it's so easy to set up a fake account) is not a real solution. If I were determined to be a troll, I would just set up a fake account and continue to make obnoxious comments, and we would have lost anonymous users who can follow the guidelines of civility.
4. Finally (and I know that the following metaphor is overblown and not entirely apropos, but bear with me), this reminds me of a discussion I had in law school about the Fourth Amendment (the protection against unlawful search and seizure). A woman in our class said "I don't even know why we have this right; if you're not doing anything wrong, why do you care if the police search you?" O_o Now, clearly, this is Nathan's blog and his way is the highway, but just because I'm not doing anything wrong doesn't mean I'm happy with being patted down, so to speak.
Have you read the Guardian "Snark" article? I think it's tangentially related to this topic. Nastiness in internet culture and all that.
I rarely comment. When I do it's usually anonymous; I'm too lazy to sign in just to say what some of the three hundred people that commented before me have already said.
Wow, learn something new everyday, I guess. I didn't really get the uproar. I post as "reader," and had no idea that the majority of blogger ID'd commentors skipped my comments because of this. Huh.
So, if the majority of people are skipping my comments or thinking I'm a rogue commentor just because I don't have a blog, well then I guess it's fine if you go non–Anon, because my comments aren't being read anyway.
Aside from one commentor who posts quite a lot — using her own name and blog — I can't really think of anyone else on this blog that regularly starts an uproar of any kind, Anon or not. But maybe they get deleted before I read them?
It's your blog. It's your call. Do what you think is right. If having the Anon function makes your day longer or more difficult, then I'd probably cut it. Like you said, it isn't a democracy.
If people choose to be anon, let them. The content, as you mentioned, is what matters. We can also choose to skip over the anons if we want. There will always be a heckler or two throwing verbal shoes. Just duck if a shoe comes your way. I think its called something like freedom of expression. To anons, how hard is it to make up a name?
I absolutely think comments that are rude, insulting, vulgar, obscene, etc. should be deleted. It doesn't matter whether they're anonymous or not. I would not hesitate to do it myself.
I would keep anonymous posting if you can — that is, if troll-posting doesn't become too common.
Donna
Another anonymous … please keep the anonymous function if at all possible.
I usually have nothing to hide from YOU or my fellow commenters, just my boss, who wouldn't appreciate me taking time out of my work day to post a comment. Also, our policies and procedure manual says that if we do something public that doesn't reflect the values of the company, it's a firing offense. Frankly, I need the insurance.
However, as a multi-pubbed author, I sometimes on rare occasions would like to give candid observations in a very small industry. This often is managed best with an anonymous posting.
Curious question for the rest of you commenters: is there any way to create TWO google IDs with the same e-mail?
My own google ID links to my own pubbed-author blog, so when I sign in, there's my lovely pix.
That would signal to Bossman that I was goofing off at the dayjob, using the computer for personal use. Already some of my co-workers have been warned NOT to post on Facebook during the workday, not even during their lunch hour, because tattlers WILL tell.
I like your decision Nathan! I began reading the comments not caring either way. I always sign in so it doesn't matter to me. I enjoy the annonymous comments and what they bring to the comment section, but I'd rather have you keep a few gray hairs out of your fabulous hair than have to spend extra time policing.
But I applaud your willingness to not only police anons and other commenters, but that you're holding them/us to a higher standard. THANK YOU for all the work you put into fostering an environment that is rich in diverse and creative ideas.
One other note: I can never erase anonymous comments from my own blog because my mother and grandparents aren't computer savvy. It's all they can do to post a comment at all, and they're so sweet about it! 🙂 For their sake, I keep it open. Do any of your family members comment on your blog? I'm curious.
I used to comment anonymously, but responsibly. I've since taken to using my name. If I can't stand up and take the guff for what I say, then I shouldn't be leaving a comment. Ban 'em.
Anon 7:06
You can't have two i.d.s to the same account, but you can have multiple g-mail accounts. You can easily sign out of one and into another.
So, if you wanted to have a 'blog' identity, you could do it through a separate e-mail, that would not be associated with your name.
No anon posting. If they can stand by what they say, they should sign their name to it.
though it's your choice, I'd keep going anon as an option. I wouldn't want people knowing that I was the one sending a certain comment when it's a comment about something I'm sensitive about. blocking anon comments just makes the person making the rude comments think 'ha! we got him to block anon!!' but if we just ignore them then they'll probably get annoyed that we aren't caring about their posts which teaches them to stop wasting their time making these comments.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone who is even the least bit interested in writing and publishing would want to do so anonymously. It defeats the purpose of writing and being published.
I realize that as a woman in the tech community, where women and those with feminine usernames are regularly subjected to harassment, threats, and all kinds of discrimination, I'm coming at this from a different perspective than the Times. In my part of the internet, anonymity is essential to protect women and minorities from degenerate assholes.
I understand the argument behind using real names to keep the debate civil and honest. But more often than not, that argument is made in complete ignorance of the privilege issues involved.
Sure, trolls don't want to be found. But neither do battered wives. People with abusive exes. People who are being, or have been, stalked or threatened. People whose published or unpublished work could get them fired, disowned, shunned, or attacked. People who are just plain sick of others making assumptions about them based on their race, ethnicity, or gender.
When you use a consistent pseudonym, you leave breadcrumbs behind that any clever person with google can use to find out all kinds of things about you. Those who don't have to fear that don't have a problem leaving you an email address or blogger name when they comment. Those of us that do have to fear that do one of two things: Post completely anonymously, or use our real names to remind ourselves not to say anything that we can't have traced back to us.
Personally, I don't say what I won't sign because I can't afford to take the risk that someone might trace an anonymous comment back to me. But I also understand that even that form of self-censorship is a privilege I've got that others don't. Because I live in a country where I'm free to speak my mind. Because my family, friends, and employers know my sexual orientation and don't have a problem with it. Because I don't write erotica. Because there's an entire police force whose sole job is to watch my place of work. Because I don't live alone.
In a nutshell, disabling anonymous comments silences those who have reason to fear for their safety online. These are people who've been silenced enough already. Personally, I would rather have to scroll past a few trolls than have to go without their contributions to the discussion.
This is an interesting discussion. I'd be even more interested to see how blog readers feel about anonymous bloggers in a future post.
So far the discussion is pointed toward anonymous comments on blog threads that are, even at their worst, basically harmless in a general sense.
But what about anonymous bloggers? They use a voice and tone that they would never use if it was attached to their real names. Some anon bloggers who write book reviews take absolute advantage of creating dangerous, vicious, book roasts for personal reasons. There are, and have been, anon agent bloggers that have gone after individuals for personal reasons.
And yet, some of these anon bloggers have some of the most popular blogs on the web. It's interesting. It's part of the web that is rarely discussed because no one takes it very seriously right now. And it's something that I think will be addressed sooner or later in courts.
Sorry for posting anonymously on this one. But I don't want any anon book reviewers coming after me with vengence. And they would if I posted under my real identity.
It's too bad that this whole blog is just open to the public without needing the public to sign in to read it too. That would be a headache, of course. But it would protect this group. Responsible access all around.
One can wish.
Another idea? (Someone asked for humor) How about a blog breathalizer test? No one can comment after twelve brandys.
I have yet to receive an anonymous comment on my blog. I enjoy the fact that I can click on the name and find out where people are from, what blogs they author and their interests. I have connected with many people this way. If you have something to say in this world, why hide behind being anonymous, what good does that do!
I would dump the anonymous option so your site is a safe place for people to learn and express opinions and knowledge that helps others. Maybe it's democracy but I'm kind of tired of catering to mean people.
Did anyone see the AP article out of Wisconsin yesterday that discussed how cases sparked by anonymous comments on blogs are beginning to show up in courts? People trying to sue to find out who is trashing their reputation, commenters suing site owners who revealed their IP addresses to infuriated people whom they had trashed, etc. It adds another dimension to this discussion: http://tinyurl.com/r9qzla
I apologize if someone already included this. I confess I did not read all 332 comments before posting.
I haven't read all the comments, but I'm with candicekennington. If someone really wants to be anonymous, they just have to register with some random name and/or have an anonymous profile. They keep their anonymity and still get to post, but the crazies likely wouldn't go to all that trouble. So let's ditch anonymous.
I'm just a crotchety old man, retired, wannabe writer and occasional substitute teacher. I don't care who knows what I really think and therefore would never post as anon. That being said, I can understand why some might. Set the anons free. Let them snark. It's all just spice for the stew.
@anon 5:05 That is one of the funniest things I've read lately even with the obvious theft from Bill Murray in Ghostbusters.
Word Ver: relityll — especially tiny?
Absolutely ban all anonymous posters. Come on people–don't you have the backbone to stand by what you believe in?
Okay, I admit, I was the last anonymous poster. Sorry, but it was so ironic I just had to do it.
But seriously, I'm for getting rid of anonymous comments.
I can think of two times that I commented anonymously here. The first time I just felt like joining the discussion when you had prompted us, asking why we write. I didn't have a Blogger account yet, and just wanted to jump in so I could get back to my manuscript. The second time (I still didn't have a Blogger account), I was writing something "pro-Nathan", and I didn't want it to look like I was kissing up/insincere by signing it.
I'm on the fence. I see the benefits of anonymous comments, but if they're at all an energy sucker, feel free to cut them.
@Anon 7:06
You can have multiple google accounts; they cannot use the same email address. If you want them to share email for purposes like reply notification, you can set your secondary account up to forward mail to your primary address.
(You can also set up your primary account to send mail as your secondary account. Be aware that the account actually sending the mail will show up in the headers. Itt's useful if you just don't want to confuse people by replying "from" a different address than they emailed.)
If you want to share an email address for login reasons, I'd suggest using the seperate account and storing the information in your browser's login manager to facilitate the login process. (Don't do this with a shared computer, like an office workstation.) The only thing you really lose is the the convenience of the perpetual login settings, but since you're commenting as anon, you're probably not using them anyway.
Regards,
Anon 6:42
PS. Sorry for the digression. I just figured since I was here, I'd answer.
I don't really like the anonymous comments. If you mean it enough to say it, you can at least sign your online alias.
I say close them. If someone wants to contribute but doesn't want to be known, it doesn't take that long to register under any name of their choosing. No one has to know who they are or how to contact them.
The only constrictions applied by dropping anons are those that keep the drive-by trolls at bay.
I know most people who post here are very young. They don't realize that some people post anonymously not because "they're too lazy to set up a blogger account" but because they don't know how. It took me a while to learn that's what I needed to do to comment–it's not as if there's a manual–so I had to post anonymously.
If you block that option, you may just be blocking out older newbies–just the people who need this blog. The real trolls will have no problem setting up aliases.
Nathan,
What a fascinating post and discussion you have incited. Good Job!
I found two types of anonymous posts on this topic funny. 1) "I am REALLY important in the biz, so I have to hide." and 2) "If I can't post anon, then I won't post at all."
To the number 1 crowd; "[unintelligible laughter] Really? I mean really????"
To the number 2 crowd; "What? You mean there would be more room for my posts? Cool."
(I feel a bit snarky here)
I personally take anons with a grain of salt. And most of the time I just laugh and move on. I write a blog, and toy with stories. And I know that most of the time, people who knows me, will know me even if they don't read my name. If I really sat down with each post and sanitized it to the point where I was truly anonymous, then two things would be true; The post would be lame. And would be of no value.
I vote to get rid of anon. (more room for me.)
My opinion is that we are all adults I believe. As adults we should all be accountable for our actions we should also be able to be adult enough to take responsibility for what we say. If we can't Man or Woman up, maybe those people don't really need to be posting anyway.
However as with anything, there is always a way around it. All the Anons have to do is to sign up an alias and spout away. But at least people could respond to that person specifically.
Another Anon poster offering a different reason:
I read the blog regularly but I very rarely view the comments. I simply don't have time. Only once before this have I ever posted when I came across a point I found particularly interesting. Therefore I didn't bother setting up an account as it was unlikely I would ever comment much and I'd probably forget my username and password before I came to use it again.
I never use my real name on the Internet for security reasons. But then I don't troll or leave rude comments and have no time for people who do.
I discovered inadvertently that once your name is on the internet it stays on the internet. After a strange interaction online with someone I would have preferred not to interact with online, I decided not to use my real name in online posts. I just use a screen name. If the blog manager needs to contact me they can, but my identity is not out there to be manipulated in any way on the internet. At least I think I am protecting my privacy.
I prefer when people take responsibility for what they write. It always elevates the quality of exchanges.
There are certain topics where I would support time-bound anon comments, but, in general, anon comments are a reflection of cowardice, not prudence.
Of course lots of people post non-anonymously under non-real names or, like me, with a single name, which is where you get into the murkier waters of identity, ethics, and community.
It's easy enough to set up an anonymous blog or identity online that I don't think anonymous commenting is necessary. If people want to be able to keep their identity a secret to comment on something sensitive, they can do that while still creating a way that their comment can be tracked somewhere. I no longer allow anonymous commenting on my personal blog because hurtful comments were made, and I had no way to respond to them. No way to explain myself or seek reconciliation.
It is such a pain to go the all of the rigmarole of signing up for some website you are going to maybe visit once or twice. Then maybe a few months down the road you will rediscover said website and of course won't remember if you signed up or not or what your password is or what email you used. I feel like I have signed up for hundreds of sites that just are not worth the hassle. In my opinion a site or blog should prove it's worth before I jump thru anymore hoops.
Your blog, your rules.
🙂
G.
Of course, you can do whatever you like with your own blog comments; I don't consider it censorship to block anonymous comments or to delete posts (whether anon or not)that are rude or disrespectful!
But I think anonymous comments are valuable, and I will appreciate it if you continue to allow them.
I hardly ever comment, but I enjoy reading through the comments, and I just don't understand the perspective that people who don't wish to identify themselves ought not to post. I can think of a number of scenarios (many already listed) where this option would be useful. Industry insiders (not me, certainly!)might have insights to share; maybe an example of a negative experience would be helpful if posted anonymously but hurtful if the poster's identity were known.
Just because some people don't want to spend the time creating an account doesn't mean they have nothing useful or of interest to contribute.
And while I think the internet would benefit from more courtesy and kindness, I also think it would be unfortunate if everyone became so circumspect that discussion and debate were stifled.
If you don't want to post with your real name you can
1. Create a blogger account using a free yahoo email address, such as this one my author created for me so I can post at "Come In Character"
or
…. just click the "Name/URL" option under the comment box and enter any name you want to!
Even a bear of very little brain can do it.
The advantage of having an account is that if you change your mind about something you posted, or think it might be taken the wrong way, you can always come back and delete it.
But if you post without an account, you can't.
Because changing my mind is what Tiggers do best!
Ack! That was a mistake… and now I can't delete it. I accidentally moved the mouse too fast and clicked "Anonymous" instead of "Name/URL" to enter Tigger.
See what I mean?
Get a life, people!
Is possible to turn off the anonymous comments for one week and see what happens to response levels ?
Not sure if you read response notes a day or days later
Keep anonymous open. I don't have a blogger account. I like reading your posts, and sometimes I like to comment, but I don't really want to have to create a blogger account just to comment.
–Hoogly
You don't need a blogger account to post comments with a name. Just use the "name/url" option under the comment box, as previously mentioned.
You don't need a blogger account to post comments with a name. Just use the "name/url" option under the comment box, as previously mentioned.
I've had a few people leave very rude and/or insulting comments on my blog and they are always "anonymous." My way of thinking is, if you're going to be big and bad enough to insult me, be big and bad enough not to hide like a little wuss. I vote for getting rid of it.
Why would you be afraid to say who you are unless you thought what you had to say was controversial? My name is Kim. And I have an opinion. And it's my right to have that opinion.
Sorry to weigh in so late.
My vote is against anonymous comments. I think the quantity would go down but the quality would improve.
I'm guilty of bouncing between two profiles (my "anonymous" Purple Clover and my real one with limited details that I'm signed in now). But I still try to own up to my comments either way.
Purpleclover (Jenn)
In all honesty, I also question how many anonymous comments are posted by the same person…
You may be responding to several comments from the same person and wasting your time if its argumentative. I've seen you do it before and every time I thought…hmm I wonder if its the same person just trying to get your goat? 😉
PurpleClover (Jenn)
Personally, I don't have an account on Blogger, but I always use my name and website so it's not anonymous. If you choose to take away the ability to post anonymously, I'd still use that option–if available.
I feel that if you can't stand behind what you're saying, then you really have no business saying it in the first place. And if you're using a "pen name" (as I am), then create an online presence that USES that pen name! I've got my "real" accounts and "pen" accounts all over the place. If you're committing to that name, then commit to it.
Really, I don't see a valid reason to keep anonymous posts except sheer laziness.
Well, that's my two cents…do I get any change back? 😉
-Daniel Allen
Aside from the civility issue, the problem with anonymous comments is distinguishing the different authors. So if the anonymous option is kept, perhaps the anonymous posters could be assigned numbers–solely for the comments on a particular post. That way if Anon 17 is disagreeing with Anon 23, we can at least follow the argument. As it is, we're already using times to distinguish a post by a particular Anon. The comments would gain some coherence if there was some way to distinguish different Anons.
Spectacular.
Anonysaurus