SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
How often do registered SoylentNews users post as Anonymous Coward, and why?
| 26% | 54 votes |
| 10% | 21 votes |
| 3% | 7 votes |
| 1% | 3 votes |
| 7% | 16 votes |
| 43% | 89 votes |
| 7% | 15 votes |
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
- Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
- Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
- This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
How often do registered SoylentNews users post as Anonymous Coward, and why?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 178 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
(1)
Good day for a change of scene. Repaper the bedroom wall.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday January 23 2025, @08:52AM (9 children)
Spamming of this Poll will be removed.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 27 2025, @01:28PM
For me, the 0-25% step is far too large, I'm less than 10, but more than 0.
Why? There are very few things I don't mind people discovering in my post history. Also, Joe_Merchant is basically a single use handle for me these days, all other uses stopped over 10 years ago. I'm more careful with my handles that are more readily linked to real life me.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 23 2025, @10:50AM (4 children)
Often I want to post about my work but some of that is sensitive and some of it is not really mine to share. Posting anonymously removes the chance of people linking back to my company.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by zocalo on Thursday January 23 2025, @01:50PM
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 26 2025, @01:54PM (1 child)
I often post as AC, especially if I am commenting about a sensitive topic.
I am far more interested in a reply where people can be completely honest on how they feel about something than trying to protect their image.
Like here...
https://www.simplypsychology.org/conformity.html [simplypsychology.org]
Where people say one thing when they are held accountable, but their internal belief system state may be quite different. They fear rejection. And parrot back socially acceptable replies when asked. AC allows us to cut to the true state of our belief. People fearing social rejection will testify to whatever the "leader" wants to protect their own reputation in the community.
The inability to openly communicate to me is the basis for people "exploding" like an overstressed pressure vessel . Problem was it's pressure indicator was censored. No one was allowed to know how close that thing is to detonation, as their metric is obedience. Yes, everyone seems pleased. Everyone smiles and agrees. Then it goes Boom!
All because some "leader" thought that they had "converted" someone when they had merely "silenced" him. Seems to happen a lot in religions and political arenas where "leadership" , obedience, and conformity are paramount.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Mykl on Tuesday January 28 2025, @11:22AM
I almost always post with my name as I feel it makes me more responsible for clearly articulating my position. I am a bit more careful to set up a proper argument than just throwing out some half-baked catchphrase.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 26 2025, @05:08PM
Yes. I've done this for similar reasons, either to avoid links back to my work or myself, or because I talk about something that is politically sensitive and don't want politics to ruin my experience and engagements with others on SN (I've seen it happen a lot in the past here, to the point some people were driven away from the site).
So I picked "25%", although realistically its probably less than 10% of my posting. Its still nice to have "post as AC" as an option, and its a reason why I do read the AC posts and upvote them for visibility when they contribute to the discussion.
(Score: 2) by looorg on Thursday January 23 2025, @12:00PM (1 child)
It's more then 0% but at the same time closer to 0% then 25%. Why? Mostly I just don't want it in my post list. I might not care that much for the conversation. It's not really for flaming or trolling. I'll take those hits if someone doesn't like what I post, I'm fine with that. But you basically know when it's going to happen, some subjects just can't be posted on without triggering someone. In those cases I might not just care and it goes there anonymously instead.
As noted by previous posters, sometimes you share things that perhaps just shouldn't be shared. But you do it anyway.
Sometimes when I write something longer, or something that needs a link or a reference, I might tick the anonymous box while working on it. Then I just forget to untick it when I'm done. So it became anonymous by mistake.
I would think those are my common reasons.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 27 2025, @01:29PM
Same same.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by pTamok on Thursday January 23 2025, @01:42PM
If it is something I feel I can't say nonymously, I don't publish it. There's a number of postings I have made, thought about, reconsidered and decided not to hit 'Submit'. I would actually like a 'Cancel' button.
Occasionally, I have hit 'Submit' by accident, rather than 'Preview'.
I might have chose to post anonymously a few times in the past, but it is definitely something I try not to make a habit of.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by nostyle on Thursday January 23 2025, @02:00PM (5 children)
I hate logging into any account online.
- I am stupid and sometimes accidently forget to tab from the username field to the password field, and so enter name/password together. Then I must expect there is a record in some log file somewhere that shows my password in cleartext. Alas, now I must change my password (again) and try to remember the new one (and that I changed it) days or weeks later. I am too old for this shit.
- Between keyloggers and hidden cameras, there is always a non-zero possibility that a bad actor might snoop my password while I am entering it, and later hi-jack my account for nefarious purposes.
- Counterfeit log-in-prompt web-pages are a thing, and passwords are harvested from them. I am too stupid to know how to recognize these.
- The "keep me logged in" option means that anyone who borrows my laptop can access all my accounts. I eschew this option.
My pseudonym has history.
- Whatever details I let slip in my logged-in postings can be collected and analysed to assemble a dossier which effectively doxes me. It is then only a matter of time before a three-letter-agency tags me - depending on who is in power.
- Once I am doxxed, others I have mentioned in my posts can likewise be identified.
- Some who have seen my logged-in postings in the past might (rightly) assume that all my postings are worth ignoring, and hence miss the magic moment when I actually (or accidentally) mention a proper truth.
- Having history can be convenient when I want to post something that I can return to or refer to later - in which case, I will log in before posting.
- I long to leave a history that is good and wholesome and might be a light in the darkness.
Sometimes I am not myself.
- Sometimes, to make a point or to get people to think, one must be facetious, or "put on a face" that is not one's own. Better to do this AC so that misunderstandings are avoided.
- Some truths are hard and cannot be expressed except in profane and hurtful ways. Better to express these as AC lest rancor arise amongst participants.
I must assume nobody understands me.
- It is my experience in life that most people do not understand the things I say without long and careful explanations. Better to be misunderstood as an AC than as a pseudonymous actor.
It's not safe.
It is no longer safe to speak freely in USA. In fact, it never was. It's just more obvious now.
-
There is more to say, but this will get you started.
--
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 23 2025, @07:37PM (3 children)
A friend of mine - a white gentlman - once recounted to me how he and his wife woke up one night back in the 60's to find the KKK burning a cross in their front yard. They were deemed guilty of being nigger-lovers. They ended up selling their home and moving to another state.
In high school, I was beaten up by a gang of football players for wearing a black arm-band in protest of the Viet Nam war. I later learned that the coach had offered to pay $5 for every such arm-band that was brought to him.
During that same time-period, parties unknown used gasoline to burn the words "FUCK YOU" into the lawn of my parent's home one night. My dad had to re-sod that patch of grass. God bless him and his patience with me.
Another friend of mine was imprisoned for some months in Iran for being a member of the Baha'i Faith. It took a bribe of $250K to get him released, whereafter he emigrated via India into the USA (no other country would grant him asylum). I have reason to believe that such oppressions might one day occur in the USA.
-
I'm sure there are many who can recount similar stories. We as a species are only marginally removed from our barbaric roots, and the pendulum seems to be swinging in the wrong direction at the moment. AC posting may be the only way ever to be truly safe.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @07:26AM (2 children)
The parent comment is another reason to post AC: confession of having committed a felony.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @08:29PM
The bribers and bribed ones are unknown to me, and the event is over forty years in the past. Even the detainee had no knowledge of the details - only that it took place. I mention the transaction only to illustrate how religious orthodoxy is used largely for extortion in various locations, and how consequently religious "speech" can be dangerous.
Some folks in those locations have been tracked down, identified and persecuted based on communications originating online in Western countries.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @03:09PM
I'd add one more reason to your points in favor of anonymous posting. No fake Internet points; people do and say ridiculous things for "likes", including misrepresenting their actual positions. Without whoring for dopamine hits, I expect that conversations tend more honest.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Freeman on Thursday January 23 2025, @02:28PM (8 children)
I assume you're trying to ask how much each of us posts anonymously. However the question reads as if you're asking us to guess how often registered users post anonymously. I almost never post anonymously. It's certainly closer to 0% than 25%, thus I will for 0%. Otherwise, I would guess that approximately only 25% of users regularly post anonymously.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday January 23 2025, @08:37PM (7 children)
Er, no. The Poll is open to everyone including ACs, much like many journals. I do not see any point in asking ACs why they do not comment under their account name if they haven't got an account.
If one of our prolific spammers decides to abuse this poll I have already made it clear what my response will be.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Freeman on Thursday January 23 2025, @10:44PM (4 children)
How often do registered SoylentNews users post as Anonymous Coward, and why? (General Question)
How often do you post as Anonymous Coward, and why? (Personal Question) -- I assume this is what was meant?
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mhajicek on Friday January 24 2025, @07:31AM (3 children)
The latter is the question I answered. I never post anon, though I can certainly imagine cases where someone would want to do so while in good faith.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 4, Insightful) by janrinok on Friday January 24 2025, @08:31AM (2 children)
There are several good reasons why people would wish to post anonymously. Our aim is to get AC participation in all stories again but we have to be able to control the spamming for that to be a practical proposition. I am trying to find as many of the good reasons as possible so that we do not dissuade or prevent registered accounts from also participating while blocking unwanted spam effectively.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 23 2025, @05:25PM (3 children)
I do it because I don't want my comments tied to me decades later, or scraped by AI. I look back at 25+ year old comments I made on Slashdot and cringe.
If SoylentNews became a thing where only registered members could view comments, I would probably post more.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Tork on Saturday January 25 2025, @12:18AM (1 child)
I do post AC fairly regularly, and the quote is one of my concerns. There's an old saying: "Don't write anything you can't erase." I actually got banned from Slashdot once over a complaint I leveled at Apple. This was a few years before the iPhone came out so Slashdot hadn't turned on them yet. Rather they were the scrappy underdog and I had the NERVE to criticize one of their services. (It was a legit concern and I think that's what set them off... I mean who gives a shit if I make up something to be annoyed with?) For MONTHS I was getting mod-bombed and eventually they dropped my karma so low I was auto-banned from the site and for like the rest of the year my posts were throttled. This ended in me changing my username and posting anonymously a lot more often. If any of you have wondered why I over-react when negative mods are unfairly used, I think my feelz are mostly rooted in that incident.
Separately someone tried to dox me over a remark I made about Linux. A friend of mine let me have an email from his domain and one of those assholes looked up his domain and posted his name and the city he was in. "Oh great, I'm raining bullshit on a friend of mine over a technical issue I complained about!" You know what they didn't post? A solution to my problem. It's fairly tame now but man.. back then the Linux zealotry on that site was awful and everyone wanted to get that magical +5 by their post.
Another reason is just don't want the email notifications on some threads, especially when it's an AC (or multiple ACs) responding. Protip: Don't use a smart watch and get into a stupid debate on this site. Heh.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @11:12AM
That is hilarious to me. I picked up a moderation enemy like on slashdot too. Except mine was because I was a shill that wasn't critical of Apple enough!
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @12:57AM
I cringe looking at what you just posted on Slashdot today.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Thursday January 23 2025, @08:20PM (7 children)
I picked 0%.
However on very rare occasion I have posted anonymously if doing so made the post funny.
Before the internet people thought villages had only one idiot.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @06:35PM (4 children)
I was near 0% until recently. Like you, I think many comments are much funnier as AC, like "asking for a friend", "I see what you did there", etc.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @07:18PM (3 children)
This is one of those instances where I would believe you except for the absolute rule that anything an Anonymous Coward says is not to be believed.
So, do I believe you? (asking for a friend)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @12:53AM (2 children)
That does not compute. Can not answer, brain exploded.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Saturday January 25 2025, @03:16PM (1 child)
Failure to believe does not mean believing the opposite.
Failing to believe an AC is not saying the AC's comment is false.
Posting as an AC is not a method to force anything into others' beliefs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 26 2025, @10:52PM
Fragments of exploded head on the ground quivering.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @01:35AM (1 child)
i'm danny b, bla bla bla. do this, do that. and i smell like an elephant's butt! 🤡
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 26 2025, @11:31PM
Oh no! How could you take such an opportunity and not mention Java even once?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 23 2025, @08:29PM (3 children)
Since you can't post anonymously anymore (outside of certain gardens/places) 100% of AC posts are logged in people posting as AC.
Oh, you wanted a different denominator? that wasn't clear in the question.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Thursday January 23 2025, @08:39PM (2 children)
The question reads (to me) as "How many registered SN users make use of the "Post as Anonymous Coward" feature?"
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 3, Informative) by VLM on Friday January 24 2025, @02:54PM (1 child)
This is an interesting thread. I read it a third way, what percentage of registered SN users do you think occasionally post as AC (including me personally as one of thousands of registered users)
(Score: 2) by looorg on Friday January 24 2025, @06:09PM
That is how I interpreted it to. Basically how many times, or how often, do I tick the "post anonymously" checkbox before I hit submit. Then why I do it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by cmdrklarg on Thursday January 23 2025, @09:01PM (30 children)
I don't use the AC option when I post. If there's something I don't want associated with my nickname I won't post it, and that hasn't happened yet.
I own what I say.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @03:31AM
I'm misunderstood too often. Not sure why other than I'm just not a wordsmith. It's clear when I write it but others somehow perceive things differently, then attack, bash, and downmod. Not interested in having that toxicity in my life (meaning, on permanent record).
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @02:17PM (28 children)
I respect your integrity, there's too little of it to go around these days. I'm usually right there with you on this.
The times I do choose to post AC while logged in it's because someone toxic needs to hear some hard truth, and I have no interest in becoming a personal project for them. Certain posters here (aristarchus, mikeeusa, APK, I'm looking at you) get vindictive when contradicted and have gone on long-term spamming/downmod campaigns against their naysayers. Since I'm logged in Janrinok knows who I am if he cares to look, but clicking the "post as AC" box insulates me from some of the venom I'd otherwise have to swallow.
And, of course, I'm posting as AC on this poll because it asked why; so why not?
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Friday January 24 2025, @02:33PM (26 children)
As it stands at the moment - and it has been the case since the site began - if you are logged in and post as AC I CANNOT identify you if you change your IP address.
It is one of the reasons why we have to control sock-puppets - once they are established I CANNOT see which account is responsible if they abuse the site. All I know is that they must have an account to get to position where they can post anonymously.
Over time, they usually identify themselves by lax security.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @05:33PM (4 children)
Understood.
I deduce from your statement that the contrapositive is true: that if I am logged in and do not change my IP address then you can identify me when I check the AC box. I'm fine with that. It's a rare occasion that I'm logged in and using a VPN [1] and my VPN decides to cycle my IP address between when I start a post and when I hit send.
I don't feel like I have anything to hide from the site admins.
[1] Tin-foil hat time: if I'm logging into a site via VPN and I've ever logged into that site without a VPN then my secret identity is already blown and the VPN is kinda useless from a privacy standpoint. Because I started posting to soylentnews long before I ever got a VPN provider that ship is long-since sailed.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday January 24 2025, @09:00PM (1 child)
I see an entirely different display to the one that you use. It lists the recent comments in order showing me the story id, the comment id, the hash of the connection, who has posted it (which might be AC or a username) and part of the comment. If I look down the list and see that someone posted from that connection using his name and then moments later posted from the same connection using AC then it is obvious that they are one and the same.
There is no subterfuge involved. It is how the displays have worked since before our site even began. That part of the code has never been rewritten as far as I can tell. It is original code. As no 2 people can be using the exact same connection at the same time there is no confusion. That is why in the first few months of the site's operation somebody even explained the process in our policy documents telling users how to hide their identity.
To allay people's concerns, the software removes the connection details from comments after a period of time has elapsed.
Of course, if you are concerned with anyone knowing your IP address you shouldn't be on the internet. Your ISP has far more information about you than just an IP number. They even have a contract with your name and address on it, and possibly your credit card details. They don't tend to share that information with anybody unless they are LE, and they shouldn't even do that unless a warrant is produced. But I don't suppose we will ever hear of any of the big names compromising their users' data will we? - oh, wait....
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 08 2025, @03:24PM (1 child)
Maybe the moderator interface does not show it, but it would be shocking if the ip using a registered account is not recorded. There have been many slips of the keyboard pointing to this being true, so trust at your own risk.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday February 08 2025, @03:45PM
All IP addresses are converted to hashes.
If you change IP address and then post anonymously there is nothing to link the AC comment with an account. It is treated as an AC post.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @01:27AM (20 children)
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday January 25 2025, @06:45AM (19 children)
That's a new idea, at least for this site. It will require some thought before making a decision.
What would the benefits be when compared to posting anonymously? You can presumably say what you wish to say now without putting your name to it. If you believe that your style of writing or the nature of the topic could compromise your identity how would that be any different by having a second account?
When the site was first created there were some who had the grandiose idea of encouraging 'whistle blowers' to use our site by providing them with anonymous accounts. It obviously didn't amount to much but this seems to be a similar idea so it will have some support. However, such accounts require additional management behind the discussions and I am not yet sure how we could manage this with the existing manpower.
So what I would suggest is that you persuade us of its necessity here in this discussion. What would it give us that the current system of anonymity does not? I may be missing some benefit which I have not yet considered, or others may have something to offer on the subject.
I would also prefer to see more people stepping forward to help run the site before I commit myself to a new task that I cannot manage alone.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @07:27AM (8 children)
Different AC. There can be multiple ACs within a single thread, like this one. The multiple user accounts the AC describes would allow users to distinguish the comments of one AC from all of the other ACs, but it would also prevent the AC comments from being tied to a user's primary account.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday January 25 2025, @07:51AM (7 children)
It is interesting because this very same suggestion a few years back was claimed to remove anonymity rather than support it. The benefit of the AC moniker is that they are all the same, or so the argument went.
If someone is concerned that using "MadeUpName1" will compromise who they are, then using "MadeUpName2" will have exactly the same problem.
Many of our community can identify who is writing no matter what name they are writing under.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @08:44AM (6 children)
It depends if a particular AC identifier like AC8675309 is permanent or if that can be discarded at will for a new identifier like AC8675310. But if an AC is permanently tied to AC8675309, it's a pseudonym not fundamentally different than if that AC's identifier was janrinok. Whether this diminishes privacy or not depends on how readily an AC can discard their publicly visible identifier.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday January 25 2025, @09:01AM (4 children)
Off the top of my head (and I haven't got time to give a better answer as I am about to depart to my ferry) it looks like your suggestion is a significant code change. We have gone from creating a second account which is doable now, to rewriting code, testing, and getting community approval for an entirely new function.
[joke] I can schedule some time in Sept 2026 for this task... Submit your patch and we can test it.[/joke]
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @09:32AM (3 children)
It's not a feature request, just an answer to your question with an explanation why some people might prefer an alternate account instead of posting as an AC, and to your follow-up question. Personally, I'm content with just being Anonymous Coward when I don't want posts linked to my account. Others may have different opinions.
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Saturday January 25 2025, @09:55AM (2 children)
I know and I welcome your input, but I do not want this the gather a momentum of its own as a new task. I am still working on the soft-delete software and UI.
The response I gave was for everybody - if they wish to submit a patch then we can test it. If it works we can demonstrate it to the community and they can decide whether it is what they want or not.
(I hate posting on my phone!)
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 26 2025, @03:06AM
This isn't one I want to oversell, I was just trying to get the temperature of the topic.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Monday January 27 2025, @08:11AM (6 children)
It is possible that people he works with also have accounts here, or just read the site occasionally. Using a second account would at least create plausible deniability, while still avoiding the problem of which AC is which in a long thread.
An interesting idea might be to assign ACs a number as they post, and reuse that number for any subsequent posts in the same discussion. ie. first AC post gets tagged as from AC001, and so does every other post in that discussion that matches the hash, same with AC002 etc.
200 million years is actually quite a long time.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday January 27 2025, @12:06PM (5 children)
I agree that it seems sensible suggestion. However the last time it was discussed (which was some years ago) it was rejected by those who usually post AC. Their argument was that each comment should be judged on its own merit and not even against previous statements made in the same thread or discussion.
I also suggested an alternative system where users could create AC accounts without submitting any personal data whatsoever. However, those accounts would be limited in function with regard to moderation etc. Again it was rejected. It seems that even an AC account is unacceptable.
To my cynical mind it indicates that some want to be able to disrupt discussions without any fear of repercussions.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 27 2025, @12:27PM (4 children)
Okay, we know that certain users are participating in bad faith and mostly want to disrupt discussions. Why are we allowing them to influence site policy beyond what measures are necessary to curb their abuse? Why should we care what these bad faith users think?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Monday January 27 2025, @02:42PM (3 children)
Well, we don't know which ACs argued against the suggestion. You are assuming that only those who wish to disrupt the site are the one's who argued against the use of AC accounts. At the time of the the first discussion ACs were still active in all areas of the site and other people were responsible for site policy. Part of the reason that I have raised this topic in a Poll is to try to determine the current reasons why some people want to post as AC at all.
Additionally, we have to have a system where those who have a genuine wish to post intelligently in discussions are free to do so where others who have other intentions are unable to abuse the site. We are reaching a stage where one particular journal has had over 200 spam comments posted in it which has effectively prevented a community member with an account from being able to hold a discussion at all. This is not an easy nut to crack. Far bigger social media sites have been unsuccessful in solving the problem.
We have identified methods which are far better at identifying abusers now than we have had in the past and, hopefully, we will be able to change the current situation. Nevertheless, without having commenting restricted to registered accounts there is no foolproof system that will prevent all abuse.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 27 2025, @11:09PM (1 child)
FTFY
It is important to have realistic expectations. Although I am hopeful for you and us given the resident's spammer apparent lack of technological aptitude.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 31 2025, @01:58AM
Solve the censor banning speech based on ideological grounds, then worry about real spam.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @06:01PM (12 children)
As of the time of this post there is exactly one vote for "I pretend to be different people", and I'm claiming it. Cue the comments of "found the sockpuppet!"
Is everyone else who does this afraid of backlash? I seem to recall open discussions of our local Trump impersonator being invited to reclaim his account credentials, with the explanation that what he is doing is condoned.
Sometimes it's fun to take a stab at writing in another voice. I've got a personal rule to only use one writing voice per article; we discourage sockpuppeting around here, and talking to myself just seems weird. I'm sure that posting as AC in a different writing style/persona can be abused, but I don't feel that it's abuse of the site per se.
Comments/counterpoints welcome.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @07:19PM
And yet...
:)
(Score: 4, Interesting) by janrinok on Friday January 24 2025, @08:30PM (9 children)
You are welcome to create an alto-ego - providing that we know about it in advance. Otherwise you get twice the modpoints, twice the voting rights, and can unfairly moderate other comments. That is where the abuse lies, not in what you write.
If we know in advance then we can disable each of those features and we can ensure that the community know that it is satire or whatever path you feel it should take.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @04:05AM (6 children)
Or - hear me out - I could avoid the hassle of juggling a second account and just post my alter-ego messages as AC. No extra modpoints, unfair mods, etc. Using a consistent signature line for a persistent alter ego would even let people connect like posts together.
Drawback: without an account name others could impersonate my alter-ego. Not sure how I'd feel about that; seems silly to get upset that someone else isn't the same person that I'm not, but I could imagine having my feelings hurt if they say something I wouldn't. If I really felt that were important, though, I could just go through the process of getting an account name w/o mod rights for the performance art.
Ah, the joys of stream-of-consciousness posting when I should be getting sleep. Take the above post with as many grains of salt as needed, I won't get salty about it :P
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday January 25 2025, @06:06AM
You are welcome to continue to post as AC. There isn't an issue with this at all.
The reason for this poll is quite the opposite. We are keen to return ACs to all discussions but that is only possible if we can prevent the site from being abused by a very small minority whose effect on other community members is significant.
Expressing different points of view robustly is the very reason for this site. Being prevented from expressing a point of view either by destroying the means to have a discussion (several journals have well over 100 spam comments which is far more than actual intelligent discussion) or by harassing specific individuals in an attempt to drive them away from the site is NOT what this site is about. No matter what views are being expressed, or however extreme they may be to one's own personal opinions, does not give someone the right to suppress those views if they do not contravene US law.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @11:26PM (2 children)
Use PGP/GPG and sign your AC posts.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 30 2025, @03:32PM (1 child)
For this to work, you'd need to post both the signature block and the public key, yes?
I was thinking about this, and signing with your private key doesn't help anyone confirm your identity unless they have a public key to validate the signature with.
Which means that an impersonator could sign with a different key and post their own private key below it, and to tell it's a different person you'd have to notice the key change. Workable, but sounds like a lot of work. It would be nice if support for such things were baked into web browsers universally (not holding my breath).
Worth thinking about.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 30 2025, @11:50PM
Yes and no. The PGP signature requires the verifier know the public key. However, they don't have to be in the same message. The signature itself contains enough information to identify the key used and that key can be obtained separately.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 27 2025, @12:22AM (1 child)
Wasn't there an AC poster who used to cryptographically sign his posts?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 02 2025, @11:51PM
Looks like they've not posted in awhile: https://soylentnews.org/search.pl?query=begin+pgp+signed+message&sort=2&op=comments&threshold=0 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by hendrikboom on Saturday January 25 2025, @08:33PM
An interesting opportunity, if that's true.
From time to time I've speculated about writing serial fiction in the form of a conversation on Soylent News -- in which two fictional characters have discussions about their life events and related matters. And in which they might interact with real Soylentils who decided to join the conversation. But I figured that the ban on sock puppets would rule that out.
I would first have to figure out appropriate fictional characters and the fictional world they inhabit. This will take a while. And the way such creation works, I might end up with something completely different.
Or nothing at all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24 2025, @06:49PM (18 children)
Now nearly 100%. Why? I fundamentally disagree with the mod system. There've been many comments and even some smaller discussions about it, but no good brainstorming.
Firstly, I'm bothered that everyone accepts it as is. My hunch is that everyone accepts it because so many other sites have similar mod systems, and people are used to it, and don't really think about what might be better.
Secondly, I flat out disagree that one person's downmod should have the power to move someone's post out of many people's view.
Thirdly, what's the point of a "karma" score if it maxes out? How is it I can get 5000 upmod points, karma is still 50, and one downmod drops my karma score 2%? Why does karma max out at 50?
I have more, but not in the mood, and frankly, I doubt anyone would have a good serious polite discussion about moderation.
While I'm ranting, I'm not sure I like this new post removing. I'm curious what was there and removed. Who decides it was so bad as to need removing? Makes me less inclined to post here on SN. I'll still read.
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Friday January 24 2025, @08:05PM (8 children)
What is being removed is only Ari's spam. Much of it is simply cut and paste and has been repeated many times in many different discussions. It usually includes an insult or an attack on another community member. The difference now is that you can see where the spamming is taking place whereas before it just disappeared.
When the system is fully integrated (which is isn't at the moment) you will be able to view the flagged posts once they have had any doxxing or illegal material removed from them. The reason that this method is being used now is that, whereas a month ago the comments were hard-deleted and therefore could not be recovered, they are now soft-deleted and can be restored. This keeps the database intact (although that was never a problem. The system failures were actually caused by running out of disk space because of an incorrectly configured database routine. The software was so poorly constructed it was easier to simply replace it with a docker container.)
However, to use the current system fully requires a UI for whoever is managing the system. That is what I am currently working on. I am having to learn new skills as I go along. If that was my only task then it might be progressing faster but there are only 2 people working on the system hardware and software now - kolie and myself. The reduction in community is mirrored by a reduction in staff. So all the other tasks such as processing submissions, refilling the queues, managing the emails, securing the site against abuse and sock-puppets etc still have to be done too. We still have a small editing team.
If you want to change the moderation system make a proposal, discuss it with the community, and lets take it from there. Anyone can each create a journal for the discussion if they wish, or make it in a submission (Ask Soylent) and we can post it on the main pages. It is your site, please take an active part.
And to top it off, I have real life issues that I am having to deal with currently. Who said life would be boring during retirement!?
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @12:50AM (3 children)
Thank you, so much, on all points. You guys are amazing. I've learned so much here, and try to contribute.
Actually, several times over the years I've tried to discuss mod system philosophy and get smacked with brick wall.
Even you, who I truly admire and revere, have stated that the mod system is self-correcting.
Actually, it isn't if you think about it. If I post, at 2, and someone downmods my post to 1, many will never see it (to possibly upmod it).
What, read at -1? I do, but not everyone does.
Due to pushback and my weariness of negation and arguing, my inventive process shut down and the mental energy has gone to more productive activities.
But I will say: I'd rather mod system be more of a democratic vote. Many votes would be needed to drop a post's score. There'd be much to talk about.
Oh, and of course, with all the site's transitions and lack of strong coders (I did buy several Perl books a year or so ago), fluff like mod system thoughts needed to be deprioritized and shelved.
Thanks for asking, and for everything. Sorry if your real life issues are problematic. Perhaps some of us can help? I'm USAian, but there are gofundme and other possibilities.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Saturday January 25 2025, @05:45AM (2 children)
Thank you for the thought but my problems aren't financial. My brother has had a stroke and his wife died only a few months ago. His family are devastated at the moment.
Secondly, my FiL now requires daily care and is being moved into a care home. Like many people of his age and with his medical conditions it is something that has to be handled delicately. Fortunately, here in Europe the support system is reasonable and everything is achievable without anyone having to bankrupt themselves in the process.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Saturday January 25 2025, @11:15PM (1 child)
I had no idea, I'm sorry about your loss. You and your family will be in my thoughts and prayers.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Sunday January 26 2025, @06:31AM
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @05:51AM (6 children)
I've been near 100% for years for pretty much the same reasons. I really like discussing stuff on forums like these, but internet points and drama around internet points are very boring and I don't like having other people decide what I should and shouldn't see.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday January 30 2025, @09:46PM (4 children)
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 02 2025, @07:03PM (3 children)
Why do I keep seeing the above message everywhere? Does this site not have a policies page detailing these things?
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Sunday February 02 2025, @07:42PM (2 children)
Yes it does. We cannot make people read the policy documents though.
There was a Meta published in mid-December - https://soylentnews.org/meta/article.pl?sid=24/12/13/155209 [soylentnews.org]. It provides links to all of the relevant documents including details of the board, commenting, use of journals, general policy and the following:
Unfortunately the Wiki is currently off-line because of a certificate update problem. It will hopefully be fixed in the next day or two.
I'm sure when you have read it you will have a better understanding of the site's policy but it hasn't changed since 2014. When it has been restored (and it has only been down for a matter of a few days) I am sure there will be less site abuse as things will be much clearer for those who seem confused.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @02:21PM
I seldom post AC i.e. not zero but less that 25%. The red hats are acting a lot like brown shirts lately. I may have to post AC more often in the future.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25 2025, @03:36PM (3 children)
I have posted anonymously once or twice.
When I do, it is usually to make a point about anonymous posting by posting anonymously.
Sometimes I even sign an anonymous post with my usual nick.
-- hendrikboom3
(Score: 2) by Kell on Tuesday January 28 2025, @12:52AM
I've had reason to post AC perhaps five times in my decades of using both the red site and the green site. I have no opinions I'm afraid to have linked back to my online handle; the few times I post AC is because I'm protecting the university I work for from blowback by randos online.
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2025, @03:09AM
I started predominantly posting anon back in the early /. days, mostly as a response to the smug karma chasers and the drama associated with that. There were people who had sig files proudly announcing that they filter and don't see comments less than 2, as it wasn't worthy of their attention, though I do admit to having fun arguing with them that posting anon somehow meant that I didn't have the conviction to publicly stand by my comments since I used an anonymous account to post them, but their courageous comments were made by posting from their anonymous account with a made up name attached to it (unless their real name really was "buzzkill99").
It really became a habit and I enjoyed it more if my AC comment went to +5. I've always browsed at -1 anyway. /. at least capped karma at 50. It was even worse on the phpBB forums in the 2000s where people considered their numbers of posts as giving them more legitimacy, where phpBB even provided the pre-social media dopamine feedback with "badges" to chase.
These days the posts and comments are greatly reduced and I suppose I don't have a lot of reasons to keep posting as AC, but it is a pretty set almost 30 year habit by now.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2025, @05:41AM (1 child)
The value of AC commenting is simple. You might be able to infer who I am from my writing style. So be it. But can you write a tool to search for all the comments in my writing style? It's a lot more difficult than scraping the comment history from my account. Sure, it might be possible with natural language processing, but it's a lot more difficult when those comments aren't directly linked to my account. That results in a meaningful increase in my privacy, because it makes it more difficult for people to find my AC comments later should they want to use those comments against me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 30 2025, @02:15AM
Writing styles must change depending on subject matter. Wouldn't a quip or offhand comment be structured differently than a diatribe on life, the universe and end the Fed?
Malign intent is sometimes easier to discern since there's a pattern to it. That isn't only the case with comments but also with moderation.
I think everyone (other than the online rubber room that is blue-hair-sky) is done with that childish, gamification crap now.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 29 2025, @11:18PM
Posting AC allows me to get more personal and controversial without staking reputation and/or revealing too much about my life. Even though IDs are pseudonyms, riffs on that pseudonym and the writing style would link back to me. I'm unlikely to be looking for a job any time soon; but regardless of your politics, why allow potential employers to link you to... anything. If you make your online ID political, or your business political you automatically alienate about half your potential clients or employers. Why do that? I saw this from the other side today. I went to a local business, and was kind of glad they didn't have what I was looking for. Why? Literally a Trump statue carved out of wood and painted, right at the entrance to the sales office, and some leftover campaign signs. Now if there are other businesses that sell the same things I might just keep that in mind and drive a few more miles down the road next time. So yeah, I guess the killer app for AC is being able to post about politics without suffering the fallout.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday January 30 2025, @09:42PM (6 children)
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 31 2025, @02:56AM (5 children)
Where is the spam? Seems like the only instance of that comment. Got the rfk brains?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 31 2025, @03:21AM (4 children)
What are you grumbling about?
That comment is visible here: https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=63287&page=1&cid=1390959#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]. It hasn't been flagged or spam modded. It hasn't been modded down. Nobody has moderated it, so it has a score of 0. Nobody has replied to agree or disagree. It's just being treated as a normal AC comment.
I'm not seeing a problem involving that comment. Why are you grumbling?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 31 2025, @03:28AM (3 children)
That would be my mistake not noticing the line only goes up to the flagged comment not the one that looks like it could be the parent. I retract my comment. Would be interesting if a few clicks could show the flagged comment content to have an idea how spam is handled.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday January 31 2025, @08:20AM (2 children)
The software that we are developing will enable you to view the flagged content. It is still being written. The reason that we are using the flag system is that no data is being deleted from the database. It is only removed from view.
The comment that you are referring to has nothing to do with the Poll topic nor is it connected to the comment above it. It is therefore off-topic, repetitive and irrelevant to the discussion, having been made numerous times before. It is Spam. It has been flagged appropriately.
An apology for your accusations will, if you ever make it, be accepted of course.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 31 2025, @02:13PM (1 child)
I made a better apology than you ever had and you've erred much worse. I have also apologized and explained valid accusations, which you then ignore and turn into more lies. Go ahead, censor away while you get to falsely accuse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 03 2025, @12:30AM (1 child)
I always post AC. I just want to voice my opinion, but deal with rabid assholes.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday February 07 2025, @09:02PM (6 children)
You are currently in a 24 hour ban on posting because of your spamming. You may not like it but it is covered quite clearly in the rules. You should try reading them.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday February 07 2025, @09:17PM (3 children)
The first amendment applies to everyone. You do not get to choose who can speak and who cannot. If you do that you are the fascist - to use your own words against you. I will try to ensure that everyone gets treated fairly on this site with regards to expressing themselves.
Have you seen their Nazi membership cards? No, you haven't. They have a right-wing view compared with your own, but that is entirely permitted under US law and the site rules. If you want to fight Nazis or anyone else whom you dislike then go somewhere else to do it.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 08 2025, @12:09AM (3 children)
Not to put too fine a point on it, but blockquoting another soylentil in appreciation of a post well laid, even though it entails some repetition, is not spam by any stretch of the imagination (other than janrinok's addled pate). This post:
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=63428&page=1&cid=1392076#commentwrap
bears repeating. Don't runaway with those scizzors in your hand, mighty censor! Even without commercial interest (spam), this has happened right here in SoylentNews.
[and, the Banhammering continues:
And the Censor in Chief says:
Rules? We don't need no stinking rules! CoC has been roundly rejected by the Soylentil community!
[DELETION FOURTEENTH accomplished! ]