And you think that to have any opinion on the use of pseudonyms, one that is not shared by the majority of posters, is de facto 'arrogant and egotistical', then? For one who claims to be on the left, you seem very set on enforced conformity within the context of some very small and utterly unrepresentative subset of people.

I've never expected any comments I've made to be given any particular weight because of who I am (or actually for any other reason ). But the suggestion that opinions should be accorded special weight because of the authority of the person making them seems a rather un-Ian Pace thing to say.    


Such bravery on one's own account is one thing but there is the point made by HtoHe about outing other people, unintentionally or not, in the process. You have said some quite detailed and personal things about some of your students and about your, and others', assessments of them (for example on the 'Upsets' thread) which, I have to say, struck me as sailing very close to the wind. The fact that you were doing it under your own, googlable, name would have made it that much easier for the individuals concerned, and their peers, to identify who was being talked about. I'm not saying that is in itself an argument for posters' anonymity but it does mean that using one's own name has implications for others as well.

No, I'm not referring to the authority of the person concerned, actually thinking more negatively, in terms of the fact that their own personal stake in the matters concerned might lead some to interpret what they say differently.

You'll note that I would never name a student; the incident in question referred to a presentation in an open research seminar (i.e. not referring to private work, which I hadn't seen at that point, and wouldn't comment on in public if I had), and the very real issues of what level of discourse is acceptable for someone looking to gain a PhD, applicable way beyond the confines of one single institution. Or if you're thinking of the cutting incident, that wasn't one of my students, I was just a spectator in the audience - and it was also a public performance.

For me there's a question here about the process of reaching understanding.

One valid use of this forum is to have a good old classical debate with posters coming to the discussion with well-formed (fully formed?).  Understanding for participants may be reached about the context in which their firmly held belief is appropriate, or potentially no mutual understanding is reached, or potentially a firmly held belief is thrown out of the window becaus ethe otehr poster(s) is(are) so damn good in their argument.  'Watchers' may learn / understand as the argument goes on.

Another valid approach is that a poster may wish to share a germ of an idea and is willing to flex their opinion about it as things go on.  More like teaching by experiment / play.

I suspect that people adopt both strategies. I suspect that it is also difficult to tell when someone is posting something as a supossition or as a firm statement.  And hence readers may form a judgement of an individual on a false assumption.  (Without face to face connection, that sort of thing is difficult).  Over a very long time, I can imagine that participants get a good feeling for what the other memebrs are like, but this forum does allow 'outsiders' to get a snatch view based on one or two posts.

You know the rubbish that gets thrown at politicians 'cos they smoked dope in college?  Who cares?  They were in college, they were a different person then than the person who was elected.  The analogy is that a named individual may say something here, and get penalised for it in real life when in reality that individual has moved on to hold a different position.

Tommo

I agree wholeheartedly - and it's even more important for those like me whose professional profile and reputation (such as it is, but it does involve a small body of published work) is in a field that has nothing whatsoever to do with music. It's a personal judgement, of course, but I'd like to keep what perfect wagnerite writes here completely separate from what I do professionally.  I'd call it discretion rather than cowardice.

Well, if they are voting for draconian measures against others who do the same, then I do think it matters - same with the 'outing' of politicians who practise/have practised same sex activity, but vote for homophobic legislation, or those who preach morality, 'Back to Basics', at the same time as shagging their 20-something secretary.

Irrelevant answer. Same reason as before.

My objection to what you have posted is perfectly clear and is to do with your superior attitude towards others on this board: that is what is arrogant and egotistical.

That's my final post on this point.

moderators / administrators

Sorry to cause more work, but would it possible to strip out appropriate answers under a thread entitled "Anonymity/Psuedonymity Discussion" to be placed in the Welcome section?

Thank you

Tommo

edit: addition of "/Psuedonymity"