: : As I understand your point now, 'own name' means nothing more than 'consistent handle' and I cannot see how for the life of me that this should matter one whit whenever assessing 'credit' around here.
: You left out the part where I specifically addressed that issue:
: ?: I know why you want people to use their real names, or at least a consistent pseudonym. One of your purposes on this board is, as I said in my first response, to identify who is 'by your definition) a "true revolutionary" and who isn't. So, you need consistency in your labels for people, that way you can say, "That was a good post by Lark, but we all know he's a reactionary homophobe, as he demonstrated HERE and HERE and HERE." Or, "Pretty good thinking, Krasny, I see you've come around to the proper way of looking at things. You've come a long way from the days when you said THIS and THIS and THIS."
: Stoller: You got a problem with being held accountable for your statements and opinions?
*I had replied to your declared TKO before this reply of which you quote was even on the board, so I can hardly be convicted of 'leaving it out.'* --K
: In a nutshell, Kransy,
*This is the fourth time you've transliterated 'Krasny' to 'Kransy' (hence the title of the post). Krasny-Krasni-Krasnaya-Krasnaia are all variations of "Red" in Russian... (not that it matters). The wider issues for me (violations of Godwin's Law and doubtless 'irrelevancy' aside...) are below...* --K
that's the whole deal there. I'm only requesting that people take RESPONSIBILITY for their statements and opinions instead of hiding under a barrage of identities.
*I agree that the phenomenon of multiple handles *can* be a tremendous annoyance. In fact, it fairly well ruined another BBS I used to frequent wherein (to cite one example) a particular Xian Fundamentalist had around 6 handles going at once... he would spam a passage from the Bible as one handle, praise the selection with another, defend against our criticisms with a third... on and on. A Virtual Congregation and the tactic of a loser.
I'm also prepared to admit that I haven't been at McSpotlight long enough to know if others are utilising the same or similiar tactics. I do not however subscribe to the notion that using more than one handle is *automatically* grounds for a charge of 'not taking responsibility' for one's own opinions; nor can I see how the use of a single, consistent handle is a mark of integrity when it could as easily be reflective of a lack of imagination in the present instance.* --K
: : For one thing, how can we really know if [Frenchy] posts under multiple handles or not? *Especially* given that mostly he spams the opinions of others?** --K
: If you paid attention to what's going on here, you'd know that Frenchy always uses the name Frenchy.
*OK, so look... I'm 'Frenchy' and my posts consist mainly of spamming various and sundry articles on the Capitalism and Alternatives BBS. Nothing but brief comments of a general nature setting up the spam and/or concluding it.
I don't give anything at all away as far as *my own* writing style goes or any other indication of just what sort of sot 'Frenchy' really is since 'Frenchy' is defined exclusively by the opinions of others in the form of spammed accounts. Can you or anyone *really know* I never post under another handle?
Now this is, by definition, a non-falsifiable doctrine. It is therefore unfair to hold Frenchy or anyone else up for scrutiny based upon this hypothesis. It is only enough to show that a reliable conclusion cannot be drawn with the information available to us.
You seem to be saying that while you disagree with the content of much of what Frenchy posts, you approve of the form (in contrast to others whom you believe hide behind multiple handles). Fair enough. Speaking for myself, form is not an indicator of character; content is. In that regard, I stand by my earlier assertion that a person's 'own opinion' means more to me than the spammed opinions of others under a consistent handle. In other words, we're hear to debate our (in the collective sense) opinions; not our handles.* --K
: Your other comments were irrelevant.
*"WE ARE THE BORG... YOUR COMMENTS ARE IRRELEVANT... YOUR TECHNOLOGY AND YOUR CULTURE WILL ADAPT TO SERVICE US... LOWER YOUR SHIELDS AND PREPARE TO BE ASSIMILATED."