The previous post "Look whom marriage" leads us to consider in more detail, as under a magnifying glass again just how insidious is the problem with the anonymity of the net.
A writer raises serious allegations against public figures, they are thoroughly dishonest and protagonists exactly the agenda that they supposedly fight, therefore shameful fraud, and these are compared to the defenseless by their nameless accusers are delivered.
Let them defend themselves against such an accusation page from which nothing is known as a text that they put into the grid?
For all the love for Nick and privacy: a public accusation so serious in my opinion can not retreat behind These kinds of self-defense credible.
Especially since all of them and put everything in one bag.
That the various cases could be different, will be considered not only how many and which defendants (all of the truth movement, exactly what - what they all?) Are really meant a whole, nor explained.
And that includes the items for Informed, as far as single incriminating, nothing substantially new, but woven from single observations a somewhat all-encompassing web of evil that should be there at work holistically.
No, it's not, friend of the night.
I impart as well as the first anonymous Netzrüge brand Magnus Wolf-Goeller.
This attack, namely, now I turn the tables look around, mate, it made those incriminated by name all the easier to escape legitimate critical questions, allowing them to point out, yes, I suppose the others were all U-boats, spinning the ridiculous who you really believe what?
I've at least got to know a whole lot of people who just feel gross in the sense outlined very well belong to a kind of truth movement, including myself, but certainly no more than 90% are phony fifties.
All the stand so as idiots and fellow travelers or those who even from those in the pillory.
The border and vice is always completely legitimate question, who is from a so-called truth movement and why u f rwen in due time, the game play of the opposing side could be so absurd.
And there is a lot of spinners and friends give back to the simple, irresponsible solutions that satisfied thereat shout: "I told you, nothing is real, everything is subverted!"
Perhaps it would be useful to introduce a classification of text types.
Class A, all texts, the author clearly stated.
Class B, all the texts of several not clearly assigned, in whole or in part, but called authorship ("editor / with material from Reuters / dpa").
Class C are all texts that appear anonymous.
Become authors of the classes AC together textually in conflict, then when an assessment always be careful on it and take off, that the clear roll-call is available under a higher proof pressure than another, that they furthermore full responsibility, that they even gross insults or blanket allegations were not the same coin can pay back.
The technique of the anonymous letter that is added is gained has been refined by the advent of the World Network, without doubt, by vast distribution and control possibilities, and certainly not only in the positive sense.
No, each party holds in the meantime his jackal Anonymusse the net, many of those who write under various pseudonyms sometimes even in the same forum, otherwise in different.
And: "Do not feed the troll" With the good old, it is not done here.
On the one hand, but again and again because of the "troll" feeds on the other hand, because the skilled troll is not so stupid to do the same even exaggerating.
The Pro-Troll knows his craft.
There are basically two varieties of it.
One sneaks benevolent-naive good one to make it more and more demands that they be rejected if, finally, as evidence seeks to use for the fascistic, treacherous, dishonest, oppressive basic trend of the arrogant and intolerant operator.
The other clever acts. She tries to settle down permanently in any direction to subtly sow discord, is aware of a call to order out openly and clearly, and no guilt laughing.
I would take this opportunity to reiterate that a suitably trained person supervise daily without further three or four forums and can earn good money, perhaps alongside even more sadistic fun and on top of my, in the name of the Lord on the road.
If it creates such then is to breed a sympathizer camp, the Administrator has clearly failed to see through the game on time and effectively intervene.
(In addition: questions about the issue "Anonymity on the Net" will be on the zeitgeist-regional meeting next week in Stuttgart - "As the Internet comes out of puberty?" - Certainly play a significant role in further details see event information above to the right..)
Addendum: How often do you hear "... as reported on the one side and the ..."? - To know then that the report is on duty any Selbstbehaupteter anonymous claim? So has delivered in the sense no report?
Basically that is is "anonymous report" a contradiction in terms: there is no such thing, strictly speaking.
May be that a particular gekennzeichnter report a false report is clear, but it is a false report and not just from the outset really do not or the report of a phantom.