I was personally ambivalent about anonymity on the mailing list. However, the fact that it appears to be predominantly men arguing for banning anonymity and women arguing for allowing it is a tell that us men folk might have our lower appendages in our orifices.
cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 14:12, Edward Almasy <0000000e5cccdc3a-dmarc-requ...@lists.clir.org> wrote: > > On Jul 14, 2019, at 8:36pm, Eric Lease Morgan <emor...@nd.edu> wrote: > > IMHO, the Code4Lib mailing list should not be akin to an anonymous chat > > room where anyone can come in and say whatever they desire under the cloak > > of anonymity. > > One must be accountable for what they say, and accountability is increased > > by knowledge of the source. It is similar to information literacy and > > citing one's references so the validity of an argument can be substantiated. > > There is also the issue of bias. Knowing, for example, that someone is from > an institution or organization that has invested heavily in a particular > platform or toolset can help put their views or advocacy into context. > > I think allowing anonymous or pseudonymous posts in this context decreases > the integrity and value of the discourse. > > Ed > > > -- > Edward Almasy <ealm...@scout.wisc.edu> > Director • Internet Scout Research Group > Computer Sciences Dept • U of Wisconsin - Madison > 1210 W Dayton St • Madison WI 53706 • 3HCV+J6 > 608-262-6606 (voice) • 608-265-9296 (fax)
