Jeroen, I am having a hard time understaning why the Wall of Shame is considered reasonable by you. I am asking the following questions to help me understand.
1) Do you believe that the hurting someone's job prospects is a futting punishiment for writing something that you considere out of line. 2) Are you sure enough in your judgement that you will not be hurting someone that deserves no punishment at all. 3) Is your desire to read, say, my posts, so high that having to killfile me in order to not read me being rude is too big of a loss for you? 4) How hard do you think it is to find a website with my name on it and selected quotes out of context; How likely would a firm doing do diligence be to type Dan Minette and see what popped up? 5) How hard would it be to go through all my posts; how likely would it be that a potential customer would do this? 6) How sure are you that you can be perfectly objective in this? 7) Why is something that is strongly opposed by many on the list, supported by only you, a good thing? Why do you think you have the right to unilaterally decide somthing like this? How sure are you that everyone who opposes the idea must be wrong?
