Do Mhks Read This Board?

[Ushtey]

It seems to depend, as in the 'real world', on who the person is. There's quite a few people who've posted in their real names, and still have to fight their corners, Steve Babb and Stu Peters for example. What you might not be aware of too, is that quite a few of us know who each other are, so using nick names doesn't really make that much of a difference.

 

I changed my nick when I stood for election. Didn't seem right to post anonymously at the time, if I meant what I was saying then I should put my name to the comments, particularly as Guests can read the forums. I post elsewhere using nicks though. If it was a private forum that Guests couldn't read then I wouldn't have changed my nick, as most poeple would know who I was anyway.

[Skeddan]

I still don't get why people would think someone asking a question has to give their name. What difference does it make to the question if instead of being from 'Skeddan' is was from 'Robert Wilson', 'Peter Hoskins' or some real name? Shoudn't the thing that matters is that the question/issue/point raised is valid one?

[VinnieK]

However I do think that this might give a home for posting in ways that some at least are currently reluctant to for being instrusive, boring or out of keeping with the tone of the Local News subforum.

 

IMO, give it a space and see what comes out of it rather than try to anticipate how exactly it may or may not fail / succeed.

 

I know. I suppose my skepticism is provoked more by a concern that a special area for a certain kind of posting will be a somewhat pompous addition to the forums. It might just be that I'm particularly jaded, but I expect a large majority of the discussions in such a subforum to mainly consist of various parties arguing from already entrenched positions via wiki-madskillz, rhetoric, and a healthy dash of showboating. If we're being honest with ourselves, this is the case and always has been when it comes to the "serious" discussions (and it's also worth noting that a fair share, if not the majortity of polemic and ad hominem appear in these very same exchanges).

 

I'm as guilty as anyone here of indulging in the worst excesses of that type of discussion, and posts of this format can be useful in so much as they point others to sources they might otherwise not know of, but they don't deserve their own forum. The main difference between such posts and others is much less one of quality or seriousness than it is mere form. Where others adopt a conversational style, most lengthy posts simply don the garb of the average debating society: a greater emphasis may be placed on the need for supporting evidence and justification, but they do not necessarly play host to reason and original thought. Indeed, some of the very best posts here, and by that I mean ones that have actually made me think about a topic and seem (at least to me) to demonstrate a greater insight or sense of issues at hand, have not been the long, meticulously and intricately wrought justifications for a particular point of view, but have taken the form of a simple comment or wry question that's been fired off the cuff.

 

I do take your point that some might be put off from contributing a post that they fear others will find boring or intrusive. My advice to those individuals, however, would be: Fuck them. On matters like these, life's too short to worry about the opinion of others in the real world, never mind in a world of pseudonyms and entertaining avatars. Be proud of being a filthy little keener!