BS: GUEST?

Subject: RE: BS: GUEST?
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Jan 16 - 10:33 PM

and I know you are fond of your paper bag heads in pubs metaphor.
But this aint a cosy old local pub.
It's the, like it or not, entirely different dimensional universe of the international internet.

Though a jukebox, and a stinky old dog snoring by the mudcat faux log fireplace would be a nice idea.

Subject: RE: BS: GUEST?
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Jan 16 - 10:26 PM

Steve we very recently had a fairly serious talk on this on another thread.
I know your long standing absolutist stance;
you know the more relaxed and flexible view & reasoning I adhere to.

"posting as guest just seems a no big deal default position unless I write something intentionally consistent with my long 'established mudcat ID / persona'.
Otherwise, I don't care if posterity credits me for random thoughts and statements here at mudcat - no matter how incisive or ridiculous.
We all have our odd quirks and idiosyncrasy. I'm not particularly driven by ego. I can't be bothered with all that tiresome nonsense."

I occasionally deliberately choose to remain anonymous when the point is more important and pertinent to a discussion
than the ID of the person making it..
To avoid the ad hominem rancour and stalking from thread to thread which plagues mudcat.

I suggested a compromise solution which might not be beyond the tech capabilities of Mudcat Admin.

"Steve, if this was my site and I had the technology, I'd implement a system whereby any 'From: box' left blank would be allocated a randomly generated name based on IP;
and that name would appear consistently whenever that IP posted anonymously...
Many of the random names might be very unflattering depending on my whims when programming the system.
That'd be a fair compromise ??? But it aint my site."

We are both annoyed that a few extreme reactionary arseholes screw it up for all other 'GUESTS'.

But I do feel your 'need' to make background checks on Guest posters that piss you off
just a bit uptight and OCD.

That's mudcat mods job, to monitor [and get their knickers in a twist] over who posts what ???

Subject: RE: BS: GUEST?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 16 - 10:03 PM

Definitely. I leap enthusiastically on to his bandwagon.

Subject: RE: BS: GUEST?
From: Rapparee
Date: 31 Jan 16 - 09:55 PM

gnu is correct, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: GUEST?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 16 - 09:42 PM

But, and bugger me sideways with a bent banana if I'm wrong, what he suggests would at least be PROGRESS. You can't look at any Guest's posting history because all Guest posts in the search are lumped together into an effin' huge great single list. Pointless or what. In the ideal world, as with the Gaughan forum, which you know well, Jack, we'd all know exactly who we were talking to, just like down the pub. What's not to like? If we really must allow unlogged-in people to post (an utterly insane policy but hey, it ain't my gig), then at least we should insist on unique monikers. But why let unregistered and unlogged-in people post anyway? Bloody stupid! It just allows cowardly bigots to post bile and hide behind all the other Great Unnamed Ones. Complete bullshit. Gnu can be a bit of an arse but he's on the money here. Are you listening, mods? Thought not!

---

Characterizing the volunteer staff as deaf to your complaints assumes facts not in evidence. This moderator would love to have consistent guest names used at all times. Particularly in the BS section.

Subject: RE: BS: GUEST?
From: Jeri
Date: 31 Jan 16 - 09:31 PM

That's not what he was talking about, Jack. He was talking about consistency. I have no clue WHO he means, though.

Subject: RE: BS: GUEST?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 31 Jan 16 - 09:14 PM

You've never revealed your real name, hypocrite.

Subject: BS: GUEST?
From: gnu
Date: 31 Jan 16 - 09:09 PM

This has been discussed for at least a dozen years on many threads in this forum but... fer fuck sake... could the admins just enforce allowing 'guests' to posts as guest with a consistent handle as it was REQUIRED in days yore (which I still don't agree with... who cares!).

Here's my 'bug'. I recently read a thread and somebody posted as GUEST X and I read the post(s) and I know it ain't X. X don't write like that and X wouldn't say the shit that Fake X said (wrote... yeah I know the diff).

Guest posts below the line?... well, that's allowed now. That's cool with me with a consistent handle. Guest posts with no handle... well, that's allowed now. And it pisses me off. Stop it. When I want to take someone to task for their ignorant bullshit, I wanna call them out by their name and "GUEST" don't butter my bread.