How would you react?

[Tambora]

This is interesting!

What if forums didn't show who posted a post?
In other words, what if you only saw the post, but not who posted it?

Someone tried this, and low and behold, it cut down on back-biting and trivial spiffs because no one knew exactly who they were responding to, and could only respond to the actual words (with no regard of who posted).

So, would you like a forum like that? Would it cause you to focus more on the message at hand, and less on any individual?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

This is interesting!

What if forums didn't show who posted a post?
In other words, what if you only saw the post, but not who posted it?

Someone tried this, and low and behold, it cut down on back-biting and trivial spiffs because no one knew exactly who they were responding to, and could only respond to the actual words (with no regard of who posted).

So, would you like a forum like that? Would it cause you to focus more on the message at hand, and less on any individual?

I like the idea.

 

[MrDeets]

I'd still know it was you, Tam, and I'd still neg you as often as I could. K:










Seriously, though, I think that would be fun as well as informative.

 

[Tambora]

I like the idea.

I don't know how I would feel about it.
I can see how it would cut down on the ad-hominem. But it seems it would also take the personal touch out of the mix.
And I kinda like the personal touch!

 

[Sherman]

I don't like boards that don't have a personal touch.

 

[Tambora]

I'd still know it was you, Tam, and I'd still neg you as often as I could. K:

Well we got to have a war going on somewhere!
:salute:

Besides, you wouldn't be alone in neg repping me.
As GloryDaze would say, "Sometimes my count goes backwards!"

Seriously, though, I think that would be fun as well as informative.

It would be interesting to see how much of a change, if any, the way you respond would be.

 

[Tambora]

I don't like boards that don't have a personal touch.

Takes all the real fun out of it!

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Takes all the real fun out of it!

We'd still know when it was GT or Meshak.

 

[Tambora]

I'd still know it was you, Tam,

We'd still know when it was GT or Meshak.

This is the reason that I think the original intent of doing it all anonymously will eventually fall by the wayside.
You would still be able to recognize most individuals by their posting style and personality. And eventually we would just make up nick-names for certain posters anyway.

 

[Nick M]

Then you can not see how the same poster over and over makes claims that are shown wrong.

 

[Rusha]

Interesting idea. The plus side would be more attacking of arguments rather than posters.

On the negative side, like Sherman stated, it would take away the personal touch.

 

[Nick M]

Interesting idea. The plus side would be more attacking of arguments rather than posters.

The poster is making the known false statement. You want to punish rape, but not the rapist. Not literally, just so the morons understand the folly of your statement.

 

[Nick M]

Well we got to have a war going on somewhere!

They are just down the road (I-70). I didn't bring up the M4 and a dozen mags loaded this time.

 

[bybee]

This is interesting!

What if forums didn't show who posted a post?
In other words, what if you only saw the post, but not who posted it?

Someone tried this, and low and behold, it cut down on back-biting and trivial spiffs because no one knew exactly who they were responding to, and could only respond to the actual words (with no regard of who posted).

So, would you like a forum like that? Would it cause you to focus more on the message at hand, and less on any individual?

I don't know. I have my favorites on this board and I generally read whatever they post (You included!).
I try to read the first few posts of newbies to get a sense of where they are coming from.

 

[Eeset]

We could just sign the messages. I'm Eeset and I approve this message.

 

[rougueone]

This is interesting!

What if forums didn't show who posted a post?
In other words, what if you only saw the post, but not who posted it?

Someone tried this, and low and behold, it cut down on back-biting and trivial spiffs because no one knew exactly who they were responding to, and could only respond to the actual words (with no regard of who posted).

So, would you like a forum like that? Would it cause you to focus more on the message at hand, and less on any individual?

Backbiting is a major issue with God. grouped among others as:

being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;…Romans 1: 29-31.


For lack of wood the fire goes out, And where there is no whisperer, contention quiets down. 21Like charcoal to hot embers and wood to fire, So is a contentious man to kindle strife. 22The words of a whisperer are like dainty morsels, And they go down into the innermost parts of the body.…

Responding to people with a name or not, we are to avoid people who are contentious, ( argue just to cause problems ) and backbiters.

With the aid of the Holy Spirit, as a community of Christians, we are to be focusing on one accord. Love and edification.
God mandates that we love each another, bear one another’s burden, and live peaceably
with one another (Galatians 6:2).

 

[PureX]

This is interesting!

What if forums didn't show who posted a post?
In other words, what if you only saw the post, but not who posted it?

Someone tried this, and low and behold, it cut down on back-biting and trivial spiffs because no one knew exactly who they were responding to, and could only respond to the actual words (with no regard of who posted).

So, would you like a forum like that? Would it cause you to focus more on the message at hand, and less on any individual?

I have no idea who is posting, now. All I see is a nickname, an avatar, and the post.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Another negative side, trolls and the disingenuous would pretend to be more than one person and sometimes even argue with themselves.

 

[Rusha]

Interesting idea. The plus side would be more attacking of arguments rather than posters.

On the negative side, like Sherman stated, it would take away the personal touch.

The poster is making the known false statement. You want to punish rape, but not the rapist. Not literally, just so the morons understand the folly of your statement.

:freak:

 

[Angel4Truth]

The poster is making the known false statement. You want to punish rape, but not the rapist. Not literally, just so the morons understand the folly of your statement.

Im pretty certain Rusha would want a rapist harshly punished, where does this come from what you said?