On 11/26/2008 04:06 PM, Steve Floyd Jr wrote:
> In the message prior to this one (below) I discussed my arguments
> against the practice of anonymity. I recently read a great article
> that discusses some disadvantages of practicing anonymity.
>
> Here's the article: http://selfsip.org/focus/anonymity.html
>
> I really like this article because it is concise in communicating a
> very important, practical, *negative* implication of anonymity. I
> understood this point of the article as thus: when making any
> decision, one must have information upon which to base hir decision.
> This point applies to any decision, including what foods to eat, what
> types of exercise to engage in, what books to read, where to buy
> food, which car to buy, etc. This article points out very clearly,
> and accurately, that the decision regarding *who to interact with* is
> also based on information. That is, if I were considering striking up
> a conversation with someone, whether I do so is dependent on the
> information I have about that person. If I have *no* information
> about a person (i.e. that person *practices anonymity*) I will likely
> choose not to interact with hir. This is because I have no
> information on which to base a decision. But, if that person were to
> tell me something about hirself, I can then at least have *some*
> information upon which to make a decision about interacting with hir.
> Without such information I can make no decision. In contrast, the
> more information I am presented with, the more confident I can be in
> my decision. So, the person who practices anonymity has a much-
> reduced chance of garnering the interest of those who hold similar
> ideas.
>
> As a personal example, I have made a personal profile on several
> networking websites. When browsing these websites I often find
> numerous individuals who have submitted no personal picture and only
> a very, very brief personal introduction.

In my own experience, this is the vast majority of people, particularly
with Yahoo profiles. Generally only a small minority provide a fairly
complete profile. Although on LinkedIn it is a high majority because
that is its purpose. However even there, few people enable their profile
to be publicly accessible.

> I recall that I have
> instinctively ignored these people and decided not to interact with
> them.

Good, except you did not do that "instinctively", rather you did it
through a lifetime of experience, learning and thinking causing your
subconscious mind to be programmed to behave that way (the behavior
that you describe below).

> I now realize that I had made this decision because I have no
> idea who they are, what they look like, what their personal
> philosophies are, etc. The people that neglect to be more descriptive
> give me no information! I only have a limited amount of time - why
> would I decide to say hello to a person who has told me nothing about
> hirself? A person who registers at networking websites with the
> intent of meeting new people, and does a poor job of communicating
> characteristics about hirself, is simply wasting hir time.
>
> This article presents a strong argument for the practice of *at
> least* being open and communicative about *some* aspects of one's
> character, including interests, dislikes, hobbies, etc. How else does
> one get acquainted with others? And communicating this information to
> a large number of people is very convenient with the internet. I plan
> on making a personal website in the future for just this purpose.
> Finally, I think the best networking sites would be those that allow
> the largest number of methods by which a person can communicate
> personal information (personal videos, pictures, writings, etc.).
>
> I hope others will enjoy this article as much as I have!
>
> ---
> Steve Floyd


Thanks for your good description and arguments against anonymity. I
have a suggestion for a different word usage in your second to last
sentence. It is better to use "enable" than "allow" as:

"I think the best networking sites would be those that enable
the largest number of methods by which a person can communicate
personal information ..."

"Allow" always relates to a reduction of some restriction of liberty,
whereas to make some process or facility available is to enable it and
to enable a client to accomplish its purpose. A lot of people use
"allow" when they mean "enable" and I, too, have been guilty of this
in the past, but the two are really quite different in social intent
and should be kept quite separate in usage.

--Paul