Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The anonymity I know

chrishateswriting.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 126 posts

Re: The anonymity I know

#101

Post by prawn »

pervycreeper wrote: post #98
pamelafox wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My only experience on 4chan was due to a Google Alert notifying me that I was the subject of a thread on /d/. That thread was the highest density collection of insults about me that I'd ever seen on the net, and sadly, I'm not yet thick-skinned enough to entirely ignore the "comments on the internet." When I see things like that, or comments on youtube videos of my talks, I sometimes think "maybe I should retreat and…

>it sure would be nice if they realized that everyone's a person I hope you realize that anonymous comments are also (usually) written by people, and the points of view they express are also worthy of consideration and respect. Making comments which lack a connection to a person's real life identity enables the commenter to use an honest and direct tone, without resorting to passive-aggressive innuendo. Also, people…

Are the ideas being attacked or the individual in this case?

Many people simply don't know how to respond to something they dislike or feel threatened by and anonymity means they don't even have to consider a valid argument in their aggression. Sometimes race or gender or other feeling of competition are enough to make people feel threatened - not much relating to social contract or "points of view worthy of consideration and respect" then.

Re: The anonymity I know

#102

Post by pervycreeper »

prawn wrote: post #101
pervycreeper wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it sure would be nice if they realized that everyone's a person I hope you realize that anonymous comments are also (usually) written by people, and the points of view they express are also worthy of consideration and respect. Making comments which lack a connection to a person's real life identity enables the commenter to use an honest and direct tone, without resorting to passive-aggressive innuendo. Also, people…

Are the ideas being attacked or the individual in this case? Many people simply don't know how to respond to something they dislike or feel threatened by and anonymity means they don't even have to consider a valid argument in their aggression. Sometimes race or gender or other feeling of competition are enough to make people feel threatened - not much relating to social contract or "points of view worthy of consider…

>anonymity means they don't even have to consider a valid argument in their aggression

Is that just speculation, or did you have an example in mind when you said that? Not being a user of 4chan's /d/ board (believe it or not!), I am not familiar with the particular controversy referenced in GP's post. Not knowing what they were reacting to, and what the reactions were, I can't comment on whether there was any "aggression" without "valid arguments" (real or perceived), but I can not think of anything that could have been posted that would be genuinely worthy of concern (that was specifically enabled by anonymity).

>Sometimes race or gender or other feeling of competition are enough to make people feel threatened

Not sure if you're referring to the commenters or GP poster, but in either case, it's hard to see how any of those could be considered relevant to the question of anonymous commenting.

My guiding assumption here is that a free, open, unfettered exchange of ideas is a higher value than preventing feelings of offense or hurt egos.

Re: The anonymity I know

#103

Post by bguthrie »

pamelafox wrote: post #86
bguthrie wrote: post #31

I think what both pieces miss is the behavior that asymmetric anonymity seems to encourage. The ability to lambast public figures from behind a screen of anonymity seems to bring out the abusive worst in people, and the target has nowhere to run. Conversely, communities in which everyone is anonymous seem to foster a degree of creativity and respect rarely found elsewhere. I think Altman was thinking about the former…

My only experience on 4chan was due to a Google Alert notifying me that I was the subject of a thread on /d/. That thread was the highest density collection of insults about me that I'd ever seen on the net, and sadly, I'm not yet thick-skinned enough to entirely ignore the "comments on the internet." When I see things like that, or comments on youtube videos of my talks, I sometimes think "maybe I should retreat and…

I wish I knew what to tell you, except that I count myself among the people who like to hear the things you say. Please don't retreat––your voice is important. No one should have to be thick-skinned enough to endure that kind of abuse.

Re: The anonymity I know

#104

Post by juliob »

I don't know about these days, but I personally had to deal with 4chan/Anonymous several years ago (before Anonymous became known for taking on public causes) and what they were doing was downright evil (and immature) with real-world consequences. "For the lolz." I wonder what moot was doing when he presided over this disgusting behavior.

Re: The anonymity I know

#105

Post by andrewflnr »

pervycreeper wrote: post #102
prawn wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are the ideas being attacked or the individual in this case? Many people simply don't know how to respond to something they dislike or feel threatened by and anonymity means they don't even have to consider a valid argument in their aggression. Sometimes race or gender or other feeling of competition are enough to make people feel threatened - not much relating to social contract or "points of view worthy of consider…

>anonymity means they don't even have to consider a valid argument in their aggression Is that just speculation, or did you have an example in mind when you said that? Not being a user of 4chan's /d/ board (believe it or not!), I am not familiar with the particular controversy referenced in GP's post. Not knowing what they were reacting to, and what the reactions were, I can't comment on whether there was any "aggres…

Well if you don't know what you're talking about, not being "familiar with the particular controversy", maybe you should refrain from defending the participants. Sometimes people's views really don't deserve any respect. None. Use your imagination. Granted, they're often perfectly capable of saying such things under their own name.

Re: The anonymity I know

#106

Post by camillomiller »

bguthrie wrote: post #31

I think what both pieces miss is the behavior that asymmetric anonymity seems to encourage. The ability to lambast public figures from behind a screen of anonymity seems to bring out the abusive worst in people, and the target has nowhere to run. Conversely, communities in which everyone is anonymous seem to foster a degree of creativity and respect rarely found elsewhere. I think Altman was thinking about the former…

Digital culture of a nation is fundamental for this to happen. The day before yesterday a 14yo girl took her life here in Italy. She was being cyber-bullied by some other anonymous teenagers on her ask.fm page. I think that's an unfortunate situation that relates more to child care than the Internet, and I know this single event can't be a case against anonymity. It's obviously not a case pro-anonymity either.

Try to explain that complexity to my 62yo father that gets angry because people are free to do what they want and be as mean as they can without facing any dire consequence because of the internet.

Journalists were not that good at explaining that IPs exist and those people who mocked the girl and told her to take her life will eventually be caught.

My father, like the majority of Italian people now gets the idea that ask.fm is a Wild West of anonymity where you can actually say whatever you want. Certainly, it's not that. Yet, it's not a place that "fosters" creativity.

Re: The anonymity I know

#107

Post by na85 »

Fasebook wrote: post #48
Kapura wrote: post #40

I always appreciate what moot has to say, and I think he's absolutely correct about anonymity creating a stage in which it's fine to fail publically. There's almost no judgement based on past efforts, which means that you can frequently see new ideas pop up. This is especially true of the boards with topics, which tend to have smaller communities than the random board, allowing for more effective meme propogation. Fo…

Don't tell that to Google, or the 10 million sites that use its libraries.

Your point being...?

Re: The anonymity I know

#108

Post by Ardren »

pamelafox wrote: post #86
bguthrie wrote: post #31

I think what both pieces miss is the behavior that asymmetric anonymity seems to encourage. The ability to lambast public figures from behind a screen of anonymity seems to bring out the abusive worst in people, and the target has nowhere to run. Conversely, communities in which everyone is anonymous seem to foster a degree of creativity and respect rarely found elsewhere. I think Altman was thinking about the former…

My only experience on 4chan was due to a Google Alert notifying me that I was the subject of a thread on /d/. That thread was the highest density collection of insults about me that I'd ever seen on the net, and sadly, I'm not yet thick-skinned enough to entirely ignore the "comments on the internet." When I see things like that, or comments on youtube videos of my talks, I sometimes think "maybe I should retreat and…

> I was the subject of a thread on /d/

Are you sure that was /d/ and not /prog/? They are a little different in content.

Re: The anonymity I know

#109

Post by Grue3 »

> What I’ve observed is the opposite—that anonymity facilitates honest discourse, creates a level playing field for ideas to be heard, and enables creativity like none other.

Clearly moot hasn't ever been to /pol/.

Re: The anonymity I know

#110

Post by timpattinson »

sp332 wrote: post #4

The conversation is “raw” to say the least—almost everyone checks their filter at the door. The resulting dialogue is about as honest as it gets. In lieu of traditional barriers to membership, the community uses cryptic and crude language to regulate who can and cannot participate. On the surface this may seem offensive, but it’s often meant to do little more than keep newcomers on their toes and encourage they lurk…

Youtube comments are terrible because it's the lowest common denominator of internet message boards. More sophisticated use Reddit/HN/etc.
Post reply on HN