Anonymous vs Real Name, or members option to decide?

Well, we do not have any of that here, so you must be right.

It does appear that way Alan. Pretty apparent from the lackluster response that there is not much interest in changing. Still though, the soul searching has led to some ideas which may help those who dislike conversing with a no-name. If you wish to engage a particular person, and want to know their identity:

1. First check their profile. You can find that on the "Toolbar" above the comments under "Members", or just click on their pseudonym/avatar/mick. They may have put a real name there. If not....

2. Ask them right up front who they are, and many will tell you.Or...

3. On that same Toolbar, there is a "Conversation" feature. Many of us here use it. Very handy for many occasions. Open it up and type in the members avatar, put a subject, say what you have to say, then hit submit. That person will be notified 2 ways: by LenrForum email, with a message that there is someone wanting to talk with, and the Toolbar "Conversation" will have a red message logo only you can see. Click on the red, and ask away. This feature is totally private. Even we Mods and Admins can not see who is contacting who, or what is being said. Even the email addresses are protected.

On a side note, when that toolbar "Forum" feature has a red message signal, it is saying you have some unread posts. Just click on them to find out which. Since the front page only shows the 10 most recent topics at a time, that comes in handy.

Quote from JedRothwell

I have mixed feelings about it. I myself would never think of posting a comment anonymously. Nor would I ever say something online that I would hesitate to say in person to anyone, including a person I am criticizing. In my opinion, if you would not have the guts to say it the person, you shouldn't say it at all. Of course exceptions must be made for whistleblowers, people reporting corrupt officials, or people ratting out drug dealers! I mean in online discussions.

I can understand our academic/university prof/student members -who we have many of here, wishing to remain anonymous. In their shoes I would not want word getting back to my colleagues at the Physics/Chemistry/Engineering Departments, that I was interested in LENR, unless I were playing the role of critic. Going by ones real name may not cause a problem, but then again it might, so why risk it? This is just a forum after all.

Quote from Max Nozin

Alan Smith these days everything insulting even staying quiet doing nothing sometimes, is it not?

Max,

With all due respect, that may be how it is in society, but not here. No one here is asked to "stay quiet", but civility is enforced (with the exception of the Rossi thread ), and politics and religion are discouraged. Seems like a good thing to me.

Russ,

Yes, there is a legal risk to running a forum. A very low risk, but it is there nonetheless. Thank you for that information. I do not see though where the law separates anonymous posters, and trolls, from those using their real names, as you appear to be implying? As far as I know, they are both treated equally in the eyes of the law. In other words, an anonymous poster is just as liable for what they say, as is one who goes by their real name.

The purpose of this thread is to discuss the pros and cons of requiring full disclosure, or continue on allowing the option to remain anonymous. It was not intended to be about the risk of libel, as it pertains to trash talking Rossi. But since you brought it up, I am almost certain no one here has a thing to worry about. I am surely not worried, and will not be losing any sleep over it. Even with someone who has a clean record, suing for libel is difficult, with the odds of winning low. Then there is always the risk of a countersuit after losing.

In the case of Rossi; with his felony arrest in Italy, followed by his well documented shady actions at Doral, the chances of his suing and winning are almost nil. With his growing real estate empire, he would put that in jeopardy with a countersuit. No, it won't happen.

BTW, in his early era (2011-2013) he threatened to sue fairly often. I think he even claimed to have hired an investigator to track down and sue the elusive Gary Wright, who was pestering him with his "ShutDownRossi" website, and lodging complaints against him with the state (Florida/North Carolina) agencies. Then he talked a few times about how he was in the process of suing the "Snake", who was Krivits. He never followed through of course, because he knows there is a not a chance in hell of his ever winning.

Going after one of us...no way. Ignore the fear grenade just thrown your way LF members, and bombs away.

Quote from Max Nozin

Why don't you apply same logic to downplay pro-annonymity people's arguments?

Those deciding to remain anonymous do not need to hear anything more from me. They have heard the arguments, decided to stay anonymous, that is their decision to make and I respect that. Who knows, maybe some want to switch over to their real names after hearing both sides, but realize we would not know who they were if they made the change now. That would be a bummer, having to reestablish themselves all over again. Anyway, I think there have been some good suggestions that came of this. I mentioned some of those earlier in this thread, and would like to offer a couple more:

We have new members joining almost every other day. I would urge them to either use their full name if short enough to fit in the members ID block when making a post, or full last name with first initial like MMckubre does. Or full first name with last initial like ShaneD., StyephenC, BruceH. do.

Another is to accept that there are those whom do not like arguing with an anonymous poster, so don't start an argument with them. To be honest, in their shoes, after spending a lifetime toiling away doing the work, to then have some nameless poster tell me my conclusions are wrong, or I screwed up...well, that would be irritating. I would tell them to shove off. Now, on the other hand, if an anon has something good to say, a 's up, or is making an argument for, then I am sure even the most grumpy of anti-anons would accept the compliment, and the back-up.

The same could be said of those providing valuable support such as *Can* has done. No reason why an anti-anon should have a problem with graciously accepting the help, and even offering a thank you in return.

There are some things the anti-anons could do also that would help. Ease up a bit for starters. Understand there are legitimate reasons some people stay anonymous. One such example was Tom Clarke, who went by his real name, and had his job threatened by another member, and was forced to erase all his posts, and leave us. Then, as I said in another post, we have many members from the universities who may jeopardize their standing, or future in the case of students, were they outed as believers in LENR. Then it may surprise you to know, but many of our anon members, are researchers in the field. Most will sign their post just to let you know, but many are simply shy.