Angel ,'Sleeper'
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: Jon B, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych, msbelle, shrift, Dana, Laura
Stompy Emerita: ita, DXMachina
I'm with DX. Real names should be explicitly opt in as opposed to opt out.
A person wrote a thank you note to a posting board and signed it with a real name.
They wrote it to the admins of a posting board. I can say with reasonable certainty that not all the emails we get are for public consumption, so it wouldn't occur to me to reveal identifying details unless explicitly allowed to by the wielder of said details.
Right -- they chose to email rather than post, which is slightly easier but also explicitly less public.
I generally agree with the decision not to post names, but I suspect that for some of the strikers, the choice not to post on the board was more predicated on the registering for yet another website (which sometimes keeps me from doing stuff). Even if they had posted, they would not necessarily have used their real names.
So, as a bullshit consensus kludge, we should email them back and invite them to join!
...And then they'd come in and blurt all over the wrong thread and we'd have to explain what guacamole is. Good times, good times.
Real names should be explicitly opt in as opposed to opt out.
I don't know why you put an extra burden on thank-you letter writers to include in their letters that you have explicit permission to publish their name. When people write letters to any public organization, and sign them with real names, they expect those names to be shared with the public.
At worst, maybe you can email the person back and ask if it's okay to publish the letter with the writer's real name.
I don't know why you put an extra burden on thank-you letter writers to include in their letters that you have explicit permission to publish their name.
Of all the burdens placed on these guys these days, I think ours is the most irrelevant.
People thank us. That's cool enough for me.
People thank us. That's cool enough for me.
Yeah. I guess I just don't see why this is such a big deal. Except that we're Buffistas...
When people write letters to any public organization, and sign them with real names, they expect those names to be shared with the public.
I think internet ettiquette is different, though. We tend to lean towards privacy. As someone upthread said, you opt in to publishing your real name, rather than opting out.
Besides, not knowing lets us imagine. I choose to believe that Amy Sherman-Palladino is our new best friend.
It's safer all around to err on the side of not publishing names without express permission. So I for another won't fault DX.
Done.
Thanks, Jon!
I know I wouldn't feel comfortable posting real names without express permission. I get a warm fuzzy reading the text of the e-mails, so thanks for posting them.