On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Madhu Menon <[email protected]> wrote: > I attach more value to somebody posting under his or her proper name. It > says you stand behind what you say. And it makes me believe I'm talking to a
> real person. Umm, as opposed to? In fact, if anonymity reduces the likelihood of an 'appeal to authority' (which is what 'attaching more value to' amounts to), or an 'ad hominem' (it _is_ a tad more awkward, all said, to make a personal attack on a '.' than on an 'Udhay') on a list for intelligent conversation alone, what's to complain about? Those who don't mind it make their names available, others only make conversation. Taking this argument to an extreme, if conversations can be looked at as being largely transactional (not that they are), even multiple people posting from a single account ought, theoretically, to be alright, as long as it doesn't happen in the same conversation. I do not, of course, know anything about the contretemps that Udhay referred to. -Anon
