Question 4: Opinion of psuedo-handles
Oct 11, 2005, 10:45 pm
#31
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: FTFOE
Programs: TalkBoard: We discuss / ad nauseum things that mean / so very little
Posts: 10,225
Originally Posted by nsx
I can see one potential use for an anonymous handle: A well-known FTer wants to post a question, opinion, or tactic that might provoke retaliation from a program who probably knows who the FTer is based on 10,000 posts. Even if he doesn't have his own web site, right Gary?
I would like to kick around the idea of explictly anonymous temporary handles, such as anon00001, a la Craigslist. These would be usable for discussing program-sensitive subjects and they would have to be traceable by administrators to a permanent FT handle. (For example, you have to be logged in to request issuance of an anonymous handle.)
Abuse of this feature would lead to time out or other consequences, applicable to all handles used by that person. Moderators would aggressively delete inappropriate posts that use anonymous handles, giving them less slack than posts using permanent handles. Naturally, personal attacks using an anonymous handle would earn immediate censure.
I would like to kick around the idea of explictly anonymous temporary handles, such as anon00001, a la Craigslist. These would be usable for discussing program-sensitive subjects and they would have to be traceable by administrators to a permanent FT handle. (For example, you have to be logged in to request issuance of an anonymous handle.)
Abuse of this feature would lead to time out or other consequences, applicable to all handles used by that person. Moderators would aggressively delete inappropriate posts that use anonymous handles, giving them less slack than posts using permanent handles. Naturally, personal attacks using an anonymous handle would earn immediate censure.
For those "questions, opinions, or tactics that might provoke retaliation from the program", there's always use of private messaging or secret discussion forums. After all, you don't want to give away all the best secrets.
FewMiles..
Oct 12, 2005, 4:56 pm
#32
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 46,817
Well, as noted by Gary and others already, I'm not entirely sure what is meant exactly by the term "psuedo-handles."
Yet, from what I understand, it is somewhat difficult to see, in general, where they are a good idea for FT and FT'ers.
IMHO, while there may be some special cases made for exemption, to be decided by Randy, for say the likes of "Kris Kringel", or even "arturo", I think it is far better to stick with the single handle concept.
Of course, for those old time, original members out there, you'll remember that may opinion on this item may have very well been swayed by the likes of:
cod
quack
Dr Pfp
Doctor PfP
Reverend PfP
Miss PfP
Karl Stevens
And on, and on, and on...
Some FT'ers may think secondary and even tertiary "handles" are useful for "humor," but IMHO, many a true word is spoken in jest. So called "humor" or "satire" at the obvious expense of other FT's should have no place here on FT or for that matter in any real caring "community!"
Thanks!
-Mark
Yet, from what I understand, it is somewhat difficult to see, in general, where they are a good idea for FT and FT'ers.
IMHO, while there may be some special cases made for exemption, to be decided by Randy, for say the likes of "Kris Kringel", or even "arturo", I think it is far better to stick with the single handle concept.
Of course, for those old time, original members out there, you'll remember that may opinion on this item may have very well been swayed by the likes of:
cod
quack
Dr Pfp
Doctor PfP
Reverend PfP
Miss PfP
Karl Stevens
And on, and on, and on...
Some FT'ers may think secondary and even tertiary "handles" are useful for "humor," but IMHO, many a true word is spoken in jest. So called "humor" or "satire" at the obvious expense of other FT's should have no place here on FT or for that matter in any real caring "community!"
Thanks!
-Mark
Oct 12, 2005, 9:59 pm
#33
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Marietta, GA
Programs: Delta MM
Posts: 609
Originally Posted by fredman
I don't like secondary handles, but I'm talking about something you can ENFORCE, and unless you have all the tools and LOTS of time to burn, you will go nuts trying to police it. Is this an area of real concern for FT ?
I don't think it so.
It takes enough time just to moderate, and now we need to do investigative work on discovery of secondary handles ? I really don't think we need to.
Secondary handles by design are used to start trouble, and good moderating will take care of problem areas, let alone who the troublemakers are.
I don't think it so.
It takes enough time just to moderate, and now we need to do investigative work on discovery of secondary handles ? I really don't think we need to.
Secondary handles by design are used to start trouble, and good moderating will take care of problem areas, let alone who the troublemakers are.
Oct 12, 2005, 11:16 pm
#34
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SQL
Programs: SPG Platinum; Hyatt Platinum; UA 1K
Posts: 3,170
Originally Posted by John C
I agree with you fredman regarding the difficulty of enforcing the “one handle” rule. And I am not proposing that we hire a database goon squad. Overall, I think we are both saying that we don't need to make any major changes with regard to this topic. My only point is that I do not believe we want to allow the difficulty of enforcement to confuse the fact that it should be explicitly disallowed. This is a case where you might not go actively looking for rule breakers, but you want the rule on the books for those instances where the problem does arise.
BTW, yet another example of problems created by multiple handles would be having multiple votes in the TalkBoard election. Not that anyone would ever do that.
Oct 13, 2005, 12:22 am
#35
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: PHL (and sometimes BKK)
Programs: aa/ua gold; mar titanium. SPG till I die.
Posts: 15,648
It's hard to enforce a one-handle rule, but then again, anyone with enough personal integrity won't get into an arguement/discussion/shouting match and create new handles to defend themelves (posing as someone else) unless they have some real issues at hand.
Oct 13, 2005, 6:35 am
#36
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northeast MA, USA.
Programs: HHonors Diamond, DL Silver, TSA Harassee
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by civicmon
It's hard to enforce a one-handle rule, but then again, anyone with enough personal integrity won't get into an arguement/discussion/shouting match and create new handles to defend themelves (posing as someone else) unless they have some real issues at hand.