Column: The wrath of the outspoken coward, or why I can't stand anonymous commenters
Published: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 - 5:16pm
THE INTERNET IS a wonderful thing. It places the entire world at your fingertips, and with the push of a couple buttons, you can access all the information you could ever want.
This not only provides the common person with a lot of opportunity, it also entitles him or her to an extraordinary amount of power that a lot of us don't realize we have.
Yes, I'm going to quote a fictional character. As Uncle Ben told Spider-Man, "With great power comes great responsibility." Yet again, this is found to be true.
With not realizing that the Internet gives us this power, we end up abusing it. The Internet is an amazing tool that can allow us to do extraordinary things, but it's also a weapon with which we can wage unnecessary virtual wars.
Privacy is invaded. Personal computers are hacked. Confidential information is leaked. Copyrighted data is pirated. People are insulted, without anyone knowing the name of the attacker.
The namelessness is what I have the most problems with, most specifically the cowards too afraid to put their names with their comments. This is what I, someone who quite often has articles and blog entries run on the Online Gargoyle, absolutely hate the most.
Occasionally, the anonymous comments are nice — people complimenting or adding to the post, who just didn't feel like they needed to put their name. But more often than not, the comment is negative.
To not put your name on a comment, in the first place, just seems silly. We want to know who you are. We want to know who's reading our stuff. To not put your name on a negative comment seems cowardly, especially when the comment is just downright mean.
Even if we were in the wrong, even if we said something incorrect or unintentionally offensive in the article, or in the comments, please own up to your response. We want to know who you are, not so we can beat you up, but so we can feel like we're not just being randomly attacked.
It may not have even been your intent to criticize us without telling us who you are, but that's not how it comes across to us as we read your response to our hard work. We, or at least I personally, see it as an attack out of nowhere, from some invisible person.
Sometimes, it's not even worth responding to, because why take the time to grace your insults with an eloquent response when you can't even take the time to tell us who you are?
It's really unfortunate that it should take courage in the first place to put your name on a comment, if the criticism is really constructive. If it's not, then why give it in the first place? It's just unnecessary.
Even if you aren't criticizing the article, but instead are criticizing the comments it has received, you have no right to put down the commenters. If they said something inaccurate or something you disagree with, then you can say so, but not viciously. All people have a right to their opinion without being shot down, which means that they have as much right to their opinion as you do.
I realize that with these articles being online and accessible to the whole world, it's impossible to not get some mean comments from people we don't know, and even people we do know. I just wanted to express my disappointment in readers who feel as if it's OK to say these things to us and not even tell us who they are, and who feel as if it's OK to say some of these things to us at all.
I am not at all suggesting that we implement a commenting system where you must register (as opposed to our current voluntary system), or even where you are forced to enter your name.
This would deter a lot of would-be commenters, and we don't want that. We want to hear what you have to say. We would just prefer to know who you are and to not be made fun of or bluntly insulted.
We're people, just like you, with strong opinions and ideas and feelings, just like you. We're putting ourselves out there by writing these articles. Our names are up there at the top, in blue capital letters. We're not afraid to voice our opinions openly, and you shouldn't be either.
Comments
You have a fair point but I
You have a fair point but I doubt people will ever change
Irony!
this comment is ironic.
Wow, I certainly did not see
Wow, I certainly did not see that coming at all....
I'm not asking people to change, just to put their name at the top of their comment. It's not that hard.
Good article
I agree completely with what you've said, Lauren, although I doubt it will stop many people from putting up anonymous comments, even the harmless ones.
Anonymous comments are fine
Anonymous comments are fine - it's the idea that counts, not who said what.
After all, things as important as choosing who runs the country are done anonymously - and I bet many people now are happy about that.
There should be freedom of expression. Some people don't feel confident enough to identify themselves (for whatever reason) and they shouldn't be denied the right to express their views.
"To not put your name on a negative comment seems cowardly, especially when the comment is just downright mean."
The comments on this newspaper are screened, so, in theory, there shouldn't even be any "downright mean" comments. (Just take a look at the Gargoyle Policies page.)
So why insist on names? What's more important - the names, or the idea?
You raise a good point
You raise a good point, Katherine. My contention would be that since no idea that is debatable (as ideas that are debated tend to be) is self-evident, presentation and credibility are a huge part of how valid we see an idea in relation to the topic to which it is being applied. The credibility of an argument is seriously damaged when the other side and observers see that the advocate for said argument is unwilling to claim responsibility for that argument. I think that's more or less what Lauren was saying in her excellent piece.
Post new comment