screen names vs real names
sf
Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
by your real name in rfc? It has happened to me and I don't think the
person it happened to recently expected to see a real name here
either. When people use their real names in private communication,
respect their privacy and keep it PRIVATE. I think it is the height
of rudeness to expose others like that. I guess I don't understand
the compulsion to appear to be part of an inner circle.
I've noticed it happens mainly to people with obvious pen names, not
so much people whose pen names sound like real names. The perps know
who they are. Keep private information private. Make it a new years
resolution. You're not in high school anymore.
--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Steve Pope
>Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
>you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
>by your real name in rfc?
No, it is never okay to do this.
If a person uses so many pseudonyms that one cannot keep them
straight, then there's some expectation of an eventual mixup. But
if it's a simple matter of having one real name and one pseudonym,
then people should fall into line and not use someon's real
name in a pseudonym space.
This goes without saying, yet is still worth saying.
Steve
brooklyn1
The DUH'WEENIE SYNDROME.
Chemo the Clown
It may not be "ok" but it is not against the law. Your name is is
pretty much public info.
Dan Abel
sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
> you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
> by your real name in rfc? It has happened to me and I don't think the
> person it happened to recently expected to see a real name here
> either. When people use their real names in private communication,
> respect their privacy and keep it PRIVATE. I think it is the height
> of rudeness to expose others like that. I guess I don't understand
> the compulsion to appear to be part of an inner circle.
It's not OK, but sometimes people need to be reminded. I've caught
myself more than once about to type your name.
--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
da...@sonic.net
Steve Pope
>On Nov 23, 11:27�am, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>> No, it is never okay to do this.
>It may not be "ok" but it is not against the law. Your name is is
>pretty much public info.
Read up on laws pertaining to online harassment.
Steve
PeterL
news:l9mlg595ros88g5ts...@4ax.com:
>
> Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
> you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
> by your real name in rfc?
If you used a false name right from the get-go, then I could understand
and agree with what you are saying.
If you made your name public at *any* time on newsgroups, you can't sit
there whining about someone using it at any time later on. You made it
public, it's out there in the 'public eye'..... you can't do that and then
ask for a retraction later on down the track and for everyone "from now
on" to completely ignore it and just use your false name.
> It has happened to me and I don't think the
> person it happened to recently expected to see a real name here
> either. When people use their real names in private communication,
> respect their privacy and keep it PRIVATE.
Well then, why did you post yours and Roberts name in a public forum.....
as well as your surname?
> I think it is the height
> of rudeness to expose others like that.
Or....... the height of stupidness to post your real name, and then cry
and whine whenever someone uses it???
> resolution. You're not in high school anymore.
>
LOL!!! One should heed one's own advice, before trying to dish it up to
others.
--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia
If we are not meant to eat animals,
why are they made of meat?
Chemo the Clown
Posting someone's name on the internet doesn't constitute harassment
unless you're harassing him.
Jim Smith
Tom Cruise
Pete Browning
John Kuthe
I've used my real legal name for a LONG time online, since the early
1990's. I finally got royally burned recently for having done so, so
now I'm very careful what I post with my real name (like now!)
I have as many aliases as I want, thanks to Gmail! :-)
John Kuthe...
Goomba
> I've used my real legal name for a LONG time online, since the early
> 1990's. I finally got royally burned recently for having done so, so
> now I'm very careful what I post with my real name (like now!)
>
> I have as many aliases as I want, thanks to Gmail! :-)
>
> John Kuthe...
>
Burned? What a hoot.
You earned whatever you got I'm sure with the childish ranting you did
here which caused so many folks to just filter you gone.
Dave Smith
He not only richly deserved his placement in a lot of filters, but he
has just reinforced the argument for filtering @gmail.
It takes an especially pathetic person to name shift in order to
circumvent filters when they know that they have been plonked by so many
people.
Arri London
sf wrote:
>
> Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
> you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
> by your real name in rfc?
No it's not OK. Same with revealing where someone lives if that
permission hasn't been granted either.
PeterL
>
>
> sf wrote:
>>
>> Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
>> you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
>> by your real name in rfc?
>
>
> No it's not OK. Same with revealing where someone lives if that
> permission hasn't been granted either.
>
>
I agree that if you use a fake name right from the very first post you make,
then you have every right to your privacy if you reveal your name to other
people via email.
What is sent to each other via email is 'sacrosanct' even if the people who
exchage any info via email have a disagreement and become 'un-friends', the
info should still be kept private. But that doesn't always happen. So if one
party reveals any personal info on the other party, then all gloves are off
concerning the revealers personal info.
But when you knowingly post in any newsgroups under your real name, including
your husbands name and your surname, you can't come back later and start
whining and crying about people calling you by name. The info is in Google
for ever (or until Google goes belly up!!), so *anyone* with a little
internet savvy can do a very quick search and come up with all the info.....
if they had a mind to, or if a thread piqued their interest in why the hell
someone was carrying on like a pork chop about being called by their name.
If Barbara had just shut her mouth and not brought the subject up, nobody
would have been any the wiser. I saw the thread, did a 3 second search and
came up with her and her husbands name and surname. Weird surname too!!
On the same search page is the Mylife.com website, with her's, her husbands,
and her kids names, ages, and where they've lived.
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Chemo the Clown wrote:
> On Nov 23, 11:27ÔøΩam, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
>>sf ÔøΩ<sf.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
>>>you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
>>>by your real name in rfc? ÔøΩ
>>
>>No, it is never okay to do this.
>>
>>If a person uses so many pseudonyms that one cannot keep them
>>straight, then there's some expectation of an eventual mixup. ÔøΩBut
>>if it's a simple matter of having one real name and one pseudonym,
>>then people should fall into line and not use someon's real
>>name in a pseudonym space.
>>
>>This goes without saying, yet is still worth saying.
>>
>>Steve
>
>
> It may not be "ok" but it is not against the law. Your name is is
> pretty much public info.
If its freely given. If i tell you my "real name" its out of my hands
how you use it.
I mentioned recently, here, in a thread [you can eat the plate] that
Wavy Gravy was once known as Hugh Romeny and suddenly the thread stopped?
Telling a secret or telling another person, personal information about
oneself is a chance one takes, the only way not to take that chance is
to never tell.
With business, government and any other corporate organizational
structure (including "family") there is a different and as yet ill
defined constitutional right to privacy.
"Ill defined" in this modern age of electronic information storage and
retrieval.
Should a parent have a responsibility and duty to be able to read their
child's cell phone & computer? Same with hand written diary's, journals
and any other type or form of communication the being they are legally
responsible for might be engaged in?
It never really occurred to me to use a pseudonym, here.
And my earlier "nom de net" of Joseph Count de Money was merely an
attempt to irritate an rudely officious person, long gone, in a now
defunct group.
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Domine, dirige nos.
Let the games begin!
http://fredeeky.typepad.com/fredeeky/files/sf_anthem.mp3
blake murphy
i think i know what you mean, but addressing you by your first name really
doesn't identify you. but you've made your preference known in this
regard, and that should be respected.
your pal,
blair
blake murphy
what the fuck are you talking about? wayne uses his full name, unlike you,
who has used at least a half-dozen pseudonyms in the time you've been here.
blake
blake murphy
and still gone.
your pal,
blake
blake murphy
sing it, brother.
your pal,
greg
Melba's Jammin'
blake murphy <blakepm...@verizon.net> wrote:
> your pal,
> greg
ROTFLMAOPMPSTC!!!
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller - Who Said Chickens Have Fingers?
10-30-2009
cybercat
"blake murphy" <blakepm...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1gb1wad3pnlt7.1...@40tude.net...
heh. Let's see, who else does this? Steve Wertz, "Ranger," and Lucas come to
mind. Om, of course.
cybercat
forgot all about him.
Chemo the Clown
So if I look up your address in the phone book and then post it on the
net...that's wrong? Google you phone number and most of the time if
it's a listed number, all your info will come up.
Dan Abel
blake murphy <blakepm...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:39:53 -0500, brooklyn1 wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:17:22 -0800, sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >>Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
> >>you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
> >>by your real name in rfc?
> > [deleted]
>
> what the fuck are you talking about? wayne uses his full name, unlike you,
> who has used at least a half-dozen pseudonyms in the time you've been here.
I don't remember Wayne saying, one way or the other, but there are
people here who have full names, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
they are their names in real life.
sf
>I don't remember Wayne saying, one way or the other,
Wayne has "said" many times. He can repeat it, if he wishes.
>but there are
>people here who have full names, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
>they are their names in real life.
That's what I'm talking about. Those who use pen names that sound
real don't have it happen to them, but people who use obvious pen
names do. I posted because I saw it happen to someone else recently
and I think it's extremely rude for people to do that to others, no
matter how chummy they think they are via email.
Doug Freyburger
>
> Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
> you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
> by your real name in rfc? It has happened to me and I don't think the
> person it happened to recently expected to see a real name here
> either.
With personal e-mail there is the same expectation as if the contents
were in a first class paper envelope. Very many people foget that and
it causes problems.
With posting there is no matching expectation of privacy. What you post
is visible to the whole world.
I think there are two issues here that are getting mixed -
1) Some people respect the difference between personal e-mail and some
don't. Some aren't even aware there is a difference.
2) If you cycle among handles you need to expect others ot notice and
conclude you're doing it for evasion. That gives incentive to dig.
There's a presumption that you're nym-shifting to avoid filter files and
that makes you fair game.
> When people use their real names in private communication,
> respect their privacy and keep it PRIVATE. I think it is the height
> of rudeness to expose others like that. I guess I don't understand
> the compulsion to appear to be part of an inner circle.
It can be distain for privacy, cluelessness about what's private and
what isn't, reaction to nym-shifting.
> I've noticed it happens mainly to people with obvious pen names, not
> so much people whose pen names sound like real names. The perps know
> who they are. Keep private information private. Make it a new years
> resolution. You're not in high school anymore.
I think the actual anonymity of posting is far lower than most think.
Posts might last and extremely long time and eventually the means of
figuring out who is who will far exceed any current privacy settings.
If you plan on posting a troll through an anonymous account think about
the fact that the post just might stay on line in an archive until you
have grown up great gand children who decide to look up your posts to
see what their ancestors were like. Leave a legacy they can respect, or
don't. Your choice. Just don't do it thinking privacy is forever and
posts are not archived.
I started posting long before anyone on-line started using handles. So
far I haven't seen a reason to switch. My writing style would be easy
enough to track given how many years I've been on-line. This Yahoo
account only dates from 2001 so it's a small fraction of my time on-line.
sf
<dfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I think the actual anonymity of posting is far lower than most think.
>Posts might last and extremely long time and eventually the means of
>figuring out who is who will far exceed any current privacy settings.
>If you plan on posting a troll through an anonymous account think about
>the fact that the post just might stay on line in an archive until you
>have grown up great gand children who decide to look up your posts to
>see what their ancestors were like. Leave a legacy they can respect, or
>don't. Your choice. Just don't do it thinking privacy is forever and
>posts are not archived.
You missed the point.
--Bryan
wrote:
> Chemo the Clown wrote:
> > On Nov 23, 11:27 am, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
> >>sf <sf.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
> >>>you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
> >>>by your real name in rfc?
>
>
> >>If a person uses so many pseudonyms that one cannot keep them
> >>if it's a simple matter of having one real name and one pseudonym,
> >>then people should fall into line and not use someon's real
> >>name in a pseudonym space.
>
> >>This goes without saying, yet is still worth saying.
>
> >>Steve
>
> > It may not be "ok" but it is not against the law. Your name is is
> > pretty much public info.
>
> If its freely given. If i tell you my "real name" its out of my hands
> how you use it.
>
> I mentioned recently, here, in a thread [you can eat the plate] that
> Wavy Gravy was once known as Hugh Romeny and suddenly the thread stopped?
>
thinnier hippie.
> --
>
> Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
>
--Bryan
Gregory Morrow
"Perhaps the USENET is not for you..."
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
<chortle>
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> In article <1gb1wad3pnlt7.1...@40tude.net>,
> blake murphy <blakepm...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> your pal,
>> greg
>
> ROTFLMAOPMPSTC!!!
Heehee, Barb...see, I have LEGIONS of Usenet fans ALL around the world...in
fact my posts are being beamed out to Alpha Centauri as we speak...!!!
;-)
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
Ya pissed there, Barbara...???
<chuckle>
--
Best
Greg
Goomba
> That's what I'm talking about. Those who use pen names that sound
> real don't have it happen to them, but people who use obvious pen
> names do. I posted because I saw it happen to someone else recently
> and I think it's extremely rude for people to do that to others, no
> matter how chummy they think they are via email.
>
Whom did this happen to? Do you know for a fact it bothered them?
You used to post under your real name, so everyone pretty much knows it.
But I hear ya about respecting privacy. We're all probably guilty of
putting too much information out there.
PeterL
news:dabel-DA07D9....@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au:
>
> I don't remember Wayne saying, one way or the other, but there are
> people here who have full names, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
> they are their names in real life.
>
Or.......... there could be people like me that (legally) change their name
completely every few years :-)
sf
wrote:
>sf wrote:
>
>> That's what I'm talking about. Those who use pen names that sound
>> real don't have it happen to them, but people who use obvious pen
>> names do. I posted because I saw it happen to someone else recently
>> and I think it's extremely rude for people to do that to others, no
>> matter how chummy they think they are via email.
>>
>
>Whom did this happen to?
You don't need to know if you didn't notice.
>Do you know for a fact it bothered them?
Does it matter? If they don't use it, then you don't have the right.
It's simple common courtesy. That person has never announced "RFC
posters, I never sign my real name but all of you can feel free to
call me xxx anyway".
>You used to post under your real name, so everyone pretty much knows it.
No, "everyone" does not know it. Certain people trot it out
occasionally. One didn't know how much it annoyed me and stopped.
Others just do it to be jerks.
> But I hear ya about respecting privacy. We're all probably guilty of
>putting too much information out there.
Yeah, I used my first name as part of my *extended* headers for a
while. It wasn't there to give anyone permission to use it on rfc,
however, and no one did during that period. It was back in the days
when I used an unmunged email address too.
Stu
-->Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote in
-->news:dabel-DA07D9....@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au:
-->
-->
-->>
-->> I don't remember Wayne saying, one way or the other, but there are
-->> people here who have full names, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
-->> they are their names in real life.
-->>
-->
-->
-->Or.......... there could be people like me that (legally) change their name
-->completely every few years :-)
witness protection??
Dan Abel
sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I used my first name as part of my *extended* headers for a
> while. It wasn't there to give anyone permission to use it on rfc,
> however, and no one did during that period. It was back in the days
> when I used an unmunged email address too.
First name and last name. And there's no difference between headers and
*extended* headers. The authors of my news client chose to put that
header at the top of every post, by default, along with five other
headers. So you, in fact, were using it on rfc, even though you
apparently hadn't given yourself permission to do so.
Arri London
Yes cos you haven't been given that permission by the owner of the
address.
>Google you phone number and most of the time if
> it's a listed number, all your info will come up.
Sometimes yes. Sometimes no.
It's one reason not to put the correct name in the phone listing in the
first place. It's not a legal requirement.
PeterL
245-199.per.connect.net.au:
LOL!!!!!
Don't forget she included her husband's name in the headers as well.
cshenk
> With posting there is no matching expectation of privacy. What you post
> is visible to the whole world.
> posts might last and extremely long time and eventually the means of
> figuring out who is who will far exceed any current privacy settings.
> I started posting long before anyone on-line started using handles. So
> far I haven't seen a reason to switch. My writing style would be easy
> enough to track given how many years I've been on-line. This Yahoo
> account only dates from 2001 so it's a small fraction of my time on-line.
Excellent info. Like you, I long predate 2001. In fact, I predate the
average person having internet access at all. Messages from me can be found
dating back to 1985. Recipes long on the web date back to 1995 and earlier.
When I started, many women used handles to mask them being female. It was a
98% male domain and we got tired of the stupid comments. Hence names like
'cshenk' which are not obvious. If you needed help with something software
(like was testing Xenapp today), back then any post would be met with a
flurry of 'oh wow, a girl' if you didnt mask it.
It's better now so no need to mask it, but I still dont make it *obvious*.
Cuts down the stupid-critter-level.
My real handle dates back to sysop chat on arpanet. You had 60 character
lines and you'd apend your initials. Mine duplicated anothers (Charlie
Parker) so we used 'xx' (female genetics). Later another came up on the
IDSC2 set outgrowth of ARPANET and used 'xy' (he was also a 'cp' initials
set). Life grows on.
PeterL
news:aX1Pm.37934$We2....@newsfe09.iad:
> "Doug Freyburger"
>
>> With posting there is no matching expectation of privacy. What you
>> post is visible to the whole world.
>
>> posts might last and extremely long time and eventually the means of
>> figuring out who is who will far exceed any current privacy settings.
>
>> I started posting long before anyone on-line started using handles. So
>> far I haven't seen a reason to switch. My writing style would be easy
>> enough to track given how many years I've been on-line. This Yahoo
>> account only dates from 2001 so it's a small fraction of my time
>> on-line.
>
> Excellent info. Like you, I long predate 2001. In fact, I predate the
> average person having internet access at all. Messages from me can be
> found dating back to 1985. Recipes long on the web date back to 1995
> and earlier.
>
:-)
You beat me by 4 years. I started in '89.
I met my American wife on rfc in about '91-'92, and got hitched in California
in '94 just after the Nothridge earthquake.
Doug Freyburger
> Doug Freyburger <dfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I think the actual anonymity of posting is far lower than most think.
>>Posts might last and extremely long time and eventually the means of
>>figuring out who is who will far exceed any current privacy settings.
>>If you plan on posting a troll through an anonymous account think about
>>the fact that the post just might stay on line in an archive until you
>>have grown up great gand children who decide to look up your posts to
>>see what their ancestors were like. Leave a legacy they can respect, or
>>don't. Your choice. Just don't do it thinking privacy is forever and
>>posts are not archived.
>
> You missed the point.
Disagreeing with you on some bits does not equal missing the point.
Being pissed at beached anonymity is fine, but anonymity is transient
and largely illusioury. Those who violate in current time are may rude
and/or may be clueless. Any anonymity that exists on-line is a matter
of following social conventions. RFC is on UseNet and UseNet draws
those who have no social scruples at all - This is not a pleasant fact
but disliking a fact does not magically convert it into a fiction.
So, recipes for Freyburgers anyone? Outdoors you have your grill
burgers. Indoors you have your fry burgers. I like to mix a little
ground pork into the ground beef. Avoiding fat leads to dried out
burgers so 25% and up fat content at the start of cooking please. Some
finely ground fresh onion and garlic. A little Worchestershire or Maggi
sauce for tang and salt. I prefer to grill my burgers pressed thin and
cooked hot and fast uncovered, but indoors I prefer to fry my burgers
thicker and lower and slower covered until the cheese goes on. Like the
Jimmy Buffet song I like mine with lettuce and tomatoes, Heinz 57 and
french fried (sweet) potatoes.
sf
<dfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Any anonymity that exists on-line is a matter of following social conventions.
Exactly
>RFC is on UseNet and UseNet draws
>those who have no social scruples at all - This is not a pleasant fact
>but disliking a fact does not magically convert it into a fiction.
That's not even what I'm pointing out. Sure there are usenet jerks
all over (even here), but "nice people", those who mean no harm and
just want to be folksy do it too. They are the ones who may read this
thread and rethink their actions.
Stu
wrote:
-->sf wrote:
-->> Doug Freyburger <dfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
-->>
-->>>I think the actual anonymity of posting is far lower than most think.
-->>>Posts might last and extremely long time and eventually the means of
-->>>figuring out who is who will far exceed any current privacy settings.
-->>>If you plan on posting a troll through an anonymous account think about
-->>>the fact that the post just might stay on line in an archive until you
-->>>have grown up great gand children who decide to look up your posts to
-->>>see what their ancestors were like. Leave a legacy they can respect, or
-->>>don't. Your choice. Just don't do it thinking privacy is forever and
-->>>posts are not archived.
-->>
-->> You missed the point.
-->
-->Disagreeing with you on some bits does not equal missing the point.
-->
-->Being pissed at beached anonymity is fine, but anonymity is transient
-->and largely illusioury.
Correct, once you post to the Internet be it a newsgroup, BBS, listserve, etc.
you're not anonymous, nor should there be any expectation so. People will find
out who you are if they take the time to dig.
Now if you've put pictures on the internet for your family on the other side of
the country to look at, subscribed to Twitter, Facebook, or any other online
community, you have no right to bitch about people finding out who you are.
Wayne Boatwright
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:56:50 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> <dfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Any anonymity that exists on-line is a matter of following social
>>conventions.
>
> Exactly
>
>>RFC is on UseNet and UseNet draws
>>those who have no social scruples at all - This is not a pleasant fact
>>but disliking a fact does not magically convert it into a fiction.
>
> That's not even what I'm pointing out. Sure there are usenet jerks
> all over (even here), but "nice people", those who mean no harm and
> just want to be folksy do it too. They are the ones who may read this
> thread and rethink their actions.
>
I see no problem with a ficticious nom de plume as long as the name and the
person is consistent. There are reasons one might want to do so. What I
despise are name shifters, shape shifters, and the accompanying vile
behavior and deceit. You, in fact, do not use your real name. Or am I
totally missing the point of this discussion?
--
~~ If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it. ~~
~~ A mind is a terrible thing to lose. ~~
**********************************************************
Wayne Boatwright
sf
>People will find out who you are if they take the time to dig.
Let them dig. It will show what kind of a person they really are.
For those who haven't put themselves out there and are exposed by
their "friends", it's a nasty kick in the chops.
sf
<waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>You, in fact, do not use your real name.
I use sf.
>Or am I totally missing the point of this discussion?
Yes, it has happened to me but as long timers have pointed out ad
nauseam, my name was in the headers at one point or another, but this
thread wasn't about me. I saw it happen to someone who never uses
their real name on rfc and AFAIC that is a breach of nicety and
respect of usenet privacy.
PS: I looked myself up and what Dan and Goomba say is true. My first
and last name were displayed at one point, I don't know how long. I
also clearly signed myself off as sf in the sig line. However,
neither of them took the time then to tell me back then that their
news readers put my real name front and center - although they are
taking great glee in pointing it out now. Hmmm. Does that tell you
anything about character?
Stu
-->On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:59:55 -0600, Stu <rec...@foodforu.ca> wrote:
-->
-->>People will find out who you are if they take the time to dig.
-->
-->Let them dig. It will show what kind of a person they really are.
-->
-->For those who haven't put themselves out there and are exposed by
-->their "friends", it's a nasty kick in the chops.
Obviously they're not your friends then
sf
This thread wasn't about me. It was about someone who doesn't put
their name out there and was exposed by someone who was just trying to
be chummy and folksy. It was a momentary lapse of judgment. I just
want people to think twice before they post the real names they use
via email.
blake murphy
> In article <gqs81g89uwwg.18avuxyoypnny$.d...@40tude.net>,
> blake murphy <blakepm...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:39:53 -0500, brooklyn1 wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:17:22 -0800, sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Is it ok for someone to flaunt your real name in public even though
>>>>you don't post it here and you've never told them it's ok to call you
>>>>by your real name in rfc?
>
>>> [deleted]
>>
>> what the fuck are you talking about? wayne uses his full name, unlike you,
>> who has used at least a half-dozen pseudonyms in the time you've been here.
>
> I don't remember Wayne saying, one way or the other, but there are v
> people here who have full names, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
> they are their names in real life.
true, i might have been too credulous in that regard. i'm beginning to
suspect 'lou decrous' is not his real name.
your pal,
(name withheld by request)
blake murphy
...leading them to conclude that intelligent life doesn't exist on earth.
blake
Wayne Boatwright
Yes, it does. I also remember, within the last year, that I addressed you
by your first name, quite innocently not knowing that you preferred it not
be used.
sf
<waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>Yes, it does. I also remember, within the last year, that I addressed you
>by your first name, quite innocently not knowing that you preferred it not
>be used.
I expressed my wishes and you respected them after that, Wayne. Thank
you. As I said before, this thread wasn't about me.
Wayne Boatwright
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:23:33 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>
>>Yes, it does. I also remember, within the last year, that I addressed you
>>by your first name, quite innocently not knowing that you preferred it not
>>be used.
>
> I expressed my wishes and you respected them after that, Wayne. Thank
> you. As I said before, this thread wasn't about me.
>
Yes, realize that, and it wasn't a very kind thing to do.
Goomba
> PS: I looked myself up and what Dan and Goomba say is true. My first
> and last name were displayed at one point, I don't know how long. I
> also clearly signed myself off as sf in the sig line. However,
> neither of them took the time then to tell me back then that their
> news readers put my real name front and center - although they are
> taking great glee in pointing it out now. Hmmm. Does that tell you
> anything about character?
>
Oh good grief.. how were we to *know* that wasn't what *you* intended? I
never cared either way what you signed or put in your return address.
Should I have? I also would have assumed that everyone everywhere
always saw the very same header information....?
What exactly does this say about my character, sf?
Goomba
>> PS: I looked myself up and what Dan and Goomba say is true. My first
>> and last name were displayed at one point, I don't know how long. I
>> also clearly signed myself off as sf in the sig line. However,
>> neither of them took the time then to tell me back then that their
>> news readers put my real name front and center - although they are
>> taking great glee in pointing it out now. Hmmm. Does that tell you
>> anything about character?
>>
>
> Yes, it does. I also remember, within the last year, that I addressed you
> by your first name, quite innocently not knowing that you preferred it not
> be used.
>
Show me where I've been gleeful about this, Wayne? I think sf is being
hormonal but I don't think I've been gleeful. I kinda thought I was
being matter of fact about it.
Wayne Boatwright
I can't really say, Goomba. I didn't see what you originally posted
regarding it. sf and I know each other through email by our real names. I
know that I would not like it if my real name was posted here or in any
other newsgroup, whether the response was gleeful or not.
Dan Abel
sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
> PS: I looked myself up and what Dan and Goomba say is true. My first
> and last name were displayed at one point, I don't know how long. I
> also clearly signed myself off as sf in the sig line. However,
> neither of them took the time then to tell me back then that their
> news readers put my real name front and center - although they are
> taking great glee in pointing it out now. Hmmm. Does that tell you
> anything about character?
Character? It was a simple correction of erroneous information, for
anyone else who might think that information in a header is not part of
their post. I don't know why you put your name there and it wasn't my
business to tell you what you were doing. For all I knew, you did what
you did for a reason. Many people do.
Dave Smith
According to some of the posts about Morrow on other news groups, some
here on Earth are wondering. He is in legions of kill files, one of
those who thrives on negative attention.
Gregory Morrow
> On Wed 25 Nov 2009 10:25:04a, sf told us...
>
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:56:50 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
>> <dfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Any anonymity that exists on-line is a matter of following social
>>> conventions.
>>
>> Exactly
>>
>>> RFC is on UseNet and UseNet draws
>>> those who have no social scruples at all - This is not a pleasant
>>> fact but disliking a fact does not magically convert it into a
>>> fiction.
>>
>> That's not even what I'm pointing out. Sure there are usenet jerks
>> all over (even here), but "nice people", those who mean no harm and
>> just want to be folksy do it too. They are the ones who may read
>> this thread and rethink their actions.
>>
>
> I see no problem with a ficticious nom de plume as long as the name
> and the person is consistent. There are reasons one might want to do
> so. What I despise are name shifters, shape shifters, and the
> accompanying vile behavior and deceit.
Heck, you are the most vile and deceitful of *all* and you use yer real
moniker, Lil' Wayne...
Maybe having to use your real name whilst posting on the 'net is a condition
of yer probation...???
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
If you'd just STFU about it the whole thang would be a "non - issue"...
--
Best
Greg
sf
wrote:
>I also would have assumed that everyone everywhere
>always saw the very same header information....?
Aren't you one of the people who claim to have been on the internet
since the beginning of time? Figure it out.
>
>What exactly does this say about my character, sf?
I think you've already guessed.
sf
and many people don't. I looked up one thread and it very clearly has
sf in the sig line of each quoted reply. Some of the replies had my
full name in the "written by" part, others just had sf. It's pretty
clear just from that thread that not all news readers display the same
things. So, if you saw I used sf in my sig line, you knew I NEVER
sign off with my real name and yet there it was being displayed w/o
full headers turned on - oh, yes, you *knew* there was a problem - you
wouldn't remember it now if it hadn't struck you as odd.
Thank you sooo much for not giving me a heads up at the time.
<sarcasm off>
Gregory Morrow
Ya know, I'm practically sure there is some sort of medication for wot
"ails" ya...
--
Best
Greg
Wayne Boatwright
My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
sf
<waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
I don't have my real name in there anymore. I'm over being honest
about who I am. Thanks.
Dan Abel
Wayne Boatwright <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
> My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
I think your newsreader is broken.
:-)
Stu
-->On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:37:48 -0800, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
-->
-->>In article <h8tqg5t6ombjlabim...@4ax.com>,
-->> sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
-->>
-->>
-->>> PS: I looked myself up and what Dan and Goomba say is true. My first
-->>> and last name were displayed at one point, I don't know how long. I
-->>> also clearly signed myself off as sf in the sig line. However,
-->>> neither of them took the time then to tell me back then that their
-->>> news readers put my real name front and center - although they are
-->>> taking great glee in pointing it out now. Hmmm. Does that tell you
-->>> anything about character?
-->>
-->>Character? It was a simple correction of erroneous information, for
-->>anyone else who might think that information in a header is not part of
-->>their post. I don't know why you put your name there and it wasn't my
-->>business to tell you what you were doing. For all I knew, you did what
-->>you did for a reason. Many people do.
-->
-->and many people don't. I looked up one thread and it very clearly has
-->sf in the sig line of each quoted reply. Some of the replies had my
-->full name in the "written by" part, others just had sf. It's pretty
-->clear just from that thread that not all news readers display the same
-->things. So, if you saw I used sf in my sig line, you knew I NEVER
-->sign off with my real name and yet there it was being displayed w/o
-->full headers turned on - oh, yes, you *knew* there was a problem - you
-->wouldn't remember it now if it hadn't struck you as odd.
-->
-->Thank you sooo much for not giving me a heads up at the time.
--><sarcasm off>
Be as sarcastic as you wish, you posted with your name and it's out there
forever. You have no one but yourself to blame, so get over yourself.
Stu
<gregor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
-->sf wrote:
-->
-->> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:37:48 -0800, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
-->>
-->>> In article <h8tqg5t6ombjlabim...@4ax.com>,
-->>> sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
-->>>
-->>>
-->>>> PS: I looked myself up and what Dan and Goomba say is true. My
-->>>> first and last name were displayed at one point, I don't know how
-->>>> long. I also clearly signed myself off as sf in the sig line.
-->>>> However, neither of them took the time then to tell me back then
-->>>> that their news readers put my real name front and center -
-->>>> although they are taking great glee in pointing it out now. Hmmm.
-->>>> Does that tell you anything about character?
-->>>
-->>> Character? It was a simple correction of erroneous information, for
-->>> anyone else who might think that information in a header is not part
-->>> of their post. I don't know why you put your name there and it
-->>> wasn't my business to tell you what you were doing. For all I knew,
-->>> you did what you did for a reason. Many people do.
-->>
-->> and many people don't. I looked up one thread and it very clearly has
-->> sf in the sig line of each quoted reply. Some of the replies had my
-->> full name in the "written by" part, others just had sf. It's pretty
-->> clear just from that thread that not all news readers display the same
-->> things. So, if you saw I used sf in my sig line, you knew I NEVER
-->> sign off with my real name and yet there it was being displayed w/o
-->> full headers turned on - oh, yes, you *knew* there was a problem - you
-->> wouldn't remember it now if it hadn't struck you as odd.
-->>
-->> Thank you sooo much for not giving me a heads up at the time.
-->> <sarcasm off>
-->
-->
-->Ya know, I'm practically sure there is some sort of medication for wot
-->"ails" ya...
10cc's of spyrine
Lou Decruss
<gregor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Would common sense be considered medication? On December 30-31 of
last year in thread titled "Christy Is Gone" SF claimed:
> Most people have their headers turned OFF. It's bad enough that most
> posters don't trim so we have to wade through all the reposted crap. Now
> you want us to wade through a bazillion headers too? No thanks.
I replied but not nearly as succinctly as Blinky just days before he
left us with this:
>The most clued have minimal headers displayed (say, From, Subject and
>Date), and when they want to see full headers they press a key (commonly H
>- for "Header", not surprisingly) to reveal the others (and again, to
>toggle them off when finished). And part of cluefulness is shown by using
>a news client with that convenience.
So now here she is bitching because she's too lazy to even look at her
own headers to know she at times has had her real name in the
organization line in her headers. Not that it matters much as on
March 19 2004 in a thread titled "stupid cooking shows" she
acknowledged what her name was.
Her real name yields 220 hits in this group. Hardly a big secret.
I've killfiled her as I can only handle so much stupidity.
Lou
~misfit~
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:35:51 -0500, Goomba <Goom...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>>
>>> That's what I'm talking about. Those who use pen names that sound
>>> real don't have it happen to them, but people who use obvious pen
>>> names do. I posted because I saw it happen to someone else recently
>>> and I think it's extremely rude for people to do that to others, no
>>> matter how chummy they think they are via email.
>>>
>>
>> Whom did this happen to?
>
> You don't need to know if you didn't notice.
>
>> Do you know for a fact it bothered them?
>
> Does it matter? If they don't use it, then you don't have the right.
> It's simple common courtesy. That person has never announced "RFC
> posters, I never sign my real name but all of you can feel free to
> call me xxx anyway".
>
>> You used to post under your real name, so everyone pretty much knows
>> it.
>
> No, "everyone" does not know it. Certain people trot it out
> occasionally. One didn't know how much it annoyed me and stopped.
> Others just do it to be jerks.
>
>> But I hear ya about respecting privacy. We're all probably guilty of
>> putting too much information out there.
>
> Yeah, I used my first name as part of my *extended* headers for a
> while. It wasn't there to give anyone permission to use it on rfc,
> however, and no one did during that period. It was back in the days
> when I used an unmunged email address too.
I did pretty much the opposite. When I first got teh intarwebs and found
usenet over 12 years ago I was warned by an IT mentor to *not* put my RL
details out there so I picked the nick ~misfit~ as I was pretty sure it was
unique. I also only used throw-away email addys when dealing with epeople.
However, a few years back some creep decided that he wanted to 'out' me and
managed to discover my first name by slithering up to someone with whom I'd
had email contact previously. I got annoyed with him and, as I didn't (and
don't) have anything to hide I posted my real name, address and phone number
(at the time, I've moved since).
I still post using the ~misfit~ name though (but now sign my posts with my
real first name) as I seriously dislike nymshifters and it's a matter of
honour for me; I stand behind everything I've ever said on teh webs (or in
RL for that matter).
It's simple really; If you don't want anyone to know your RL details NEVER
use them in cyberspace. Do it just once and, thanks to Google and others who
are archiving all of usenet and a lot of web traffic, it's out there for
ever if anyone really wants to know it.
IOW it's no good crying over spilt milk.
Oh, I forgot, you won't see this as you have me killfiled. <shrug>
--
Shaun.
"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.
~misfit~
... and for OE users if you download OEQuotefix you can get it to put
whatever *you* decide there via a formula.
~misfit~
LOL! Blaming others for your ignorance? Yeah, great plan.
Shit! Do you have antivirus software installed and up-to-date? It'd be a
shame of you blamed me for you getting a virus just 'cause I didn't educate
you.
~misfit~
> <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>
>> My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
>
> I don't have my real name in there anymore. I'm over being honest
> about who I am. Thanks.
This from the person who started in on me with an attitude because the
'from' field in my posts doesn't have a real-sounding name.
From the way this thread turned out it's probably best that you're not
honest about who you are... even to yourself.
cybercat
"~misfit~" <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote in message
news:heknh7$l9k$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Somewhere on teh intarwebs sf wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:38:20 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>> <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
>>
>> I don't have my real name in there anymore. I'm over being honest
>> about who I am. Thanks.
>
> This from the person who started in on me with an attitude because the
> 'from' field in my posts doesn't have a real-sounding name.
>
> From the way this thread turned out it's probably best that you're not
> honest about who you are... even to yourself.
> --
You're an asshole, dood.
notbob
> You're an asshole, dood.
Ahhh.... the voice of profound intellectualism here on rfc. :|
nb
PeterL
@news.eternal-september.org:
> Somewhere on teh intarwebs sf wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:38:20 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>> <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
>>
>> I don't have my real name in there anymore. I'm over being honest
>> about who I am. Thanks.
>
> This from the person who started in on me with an attitude because the
> 'from' field in my posts doesn't have a real-sounding name.
>
> From the way this thread turned out it's probably best that you're not
> honest about who you are... even to yourself.
She is of the opinion that *she* (and several others) 'own' this group
because they've been posting here for longer.
Silly little people that they are!!!
--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia
If we are not meant to eat animals,
why are they made of meat?
Bob Muncie
> "~misfit~" <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote in news:heknh7$l9k$1
> @news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> Somewhere on teh intarwebs sf wrote:
>>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:38:20 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>>> <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
>>> I don't have my real name in there anymore. I'm over being honest
>>> about who I am. Thanks.
>> This from the person who started in on me with an attitude because the
>> 'from' field in my posts doesn't have a real-sounding name.
>>
>> From the way this thread turned out it's probably best that you're not
>> honest about who you are... even to yourself.
>
>
>
> She is of the opinion that *she* (and several others) 'own' this group
> because they've been posting here for longer.
>
> Silly little people that they are!!!
>
>
OTOH, you and a few others could just choice to be polite rather than
contrary.
Nobody told you what you should be doing. Someone just pointed out the
politeness of *not* sharing names, where their posted preferences exist.
What is the big deal with that?
Bob
The Ranger
news:slrnhgrpl5...@myvai2.notbob.com...
> On 2009-11-26, cybercat <cyber...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> You're an asshole, dood.
>
> Ahhh.... the voice of profound intellectualism here on rfc. :|
As usual... Why expect anything from cybertwit's limited vocabulary and
impeded imagination?
The Ranger
Gregory Morrow
Heehee, nb...
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
Hey, show her some Christian charity, her hymen is very thick and rubbery
and so at times she has a choleric disposition...
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:25:02 -0600, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>> Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>>
>>> In article <1gb1wad3pnlt7.1...@40tude.net>,
>>> blake murphy <blakepm...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> your pal,
>>>> greg
>>>
>>> ROTFLMAOPMPSTC!!!
>>
>> Heehee, Barb...see, I have LEGIONS of Usenet fans ALL around the
>> world...in fact my posts are being beamed out to Alpha Centauri as
>> we speak...!!!
>>
>> ;-)
>
> ...leading them to conclude that intelligent life doesn't exist on
> earth.
Naw, they are being beamed back to Andy...
<chuckle>
--
Best
Greg
sf
>In article <Xns9CCE94EA4AB6Awa...@69.16.185.247>,
> Wayne Boatwright <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>
>
>> My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
>
>I think your newsreader is broken.
>
>
I don't know what you see now, so if you see more please email a
screen shot of your current display.
sf
>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:00:53 -0800, sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>-->
>-->Thank you sooo much for not giving me a heads up at the time.
>--><sarcasm off>
>
>Be as sarcastic as you wish, you posted with your name and it's out there
>forever.
I know that, but only social cretins would do it.
This thread didn't start off about me, but you and a couple of others
are determined to make it all about me... so I'll play.
No Stu, I don't have a problem with people knowing my name if they
were curious enough to display all headers, but I didn't expect it to
be displayed for every Tom, Dick and Harriet who clicked on a post...
it was intended to be one layer under.
>You have no one but yourself to blame, so get over yourself.
This thread didn't start off about me but certain people (including
you now) have turned it into that, so I'll play. I haven't included
my name in the headers for quite a while now and expect long timers
not to act like they are chummy with me.
Those people who claim to know my name (and they should) also know I
don't sign off with my real name. I signed off as sf back in those
days. Call it a clue for the clueless. Only an idiot or someone who
doesn't flying you know what about social boundaries would call me by
my first name in rfc. I am not your friend, I am not anybody's
personal friend here and I have not told *anyone* to call me anything
other than sf in the ng.... ever. If and when certain people choose
to do that, they are showing their true character and all of its
ugliness to this ng - in the end it's their problem not mine.
Think about it stu. sf is only two letters. It takes a lot more
effort to remember my name and type it. So, what is their real intent
when they do it? It's *not* a mistake when it happens. You're a big
boy, so you can figure it out all by yourself.
Again: Wayne and Om have mended their ways.
Dan Abel
sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:51:03 -0800, Dan Abel <da...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <Xns9CCE94EA4AB6Awa...@69.16.185.247>,
> > Wayne Boatwright <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
> >
> >I think your newsreader is broken.
> >
> >
> I don't know what you see now, so if you see more please email a
> screen shot of your current display.
Sorry, it was a joke. That's why I put the "smiley" at the bottom. If
every single line of every single header on every single post says "sf",
then his newsreader is broken.
:-)
Obviously, he should only see "sf" on the "FROM" header, and only on
posts from you.
Goomba
> On Wed 25 Nov 2009 01:02:11p, Goomba told us...
>> Show me where I've been gleeful about this, Wayne? I think sf is being
>> hormonal but I don't think I've been gleeful. I kinda thought I was
>> being matter of fact about it.
>>
>
> I can't really say, Goomba. I didn't see what you originally posted
> regarding it. sf and I know each other through email by our real names. I
> know that I would not like it if my real name was posted here or in any
> other newsgroup, whether the response was gleeful or not.
>
This is my post in this thread (my only other two posts were in response
to being accused of being gleeful about sf's situation):
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.food.cooking/browse_thread/thread/22c0fba79454285c/1ff12f3d14008a7a?q=rec.food.cooking#1ff12f3d14008a7a
"Whom did this happen to? Do you know for a fact it bothered them?
You used to post under your real name, so everyone pretty much knows it.
But I hear ya about respecting privacy. We're all probably guilty of
putting too much information out there. "
There ya go-I'd like to hear where you or Sf see "glee" in this
response? If sf is too stupid to know she put her own name out there
repeatedly, where does she get off accusing others of misdeed by
admitting that they saw it?
I'm obviously not the one who "outted" anyone of anything.
Goomba
>> This thread wasn't about me. It was about someone who doesn't put
>> their name out there and was exposed by someone who was just trying to
>> be chummy and folksy. It was a momentary lapse of judgment. I just
>> want people to think twice before they post the real names they use
>> via email.
>
>
> If you'd just STFU about it the whole thang would be a "non - issue"...
>
My mother used to tell us the every year the nuns at her Catholic school
would make all the girls promise to not read any of the books on the
"forbidden list".....which caused all the girls to immediately rush out
and try to find and read just these books to find out what the fuss was
all about!! This thread by sf certainly did do about the same, eh?
Goomba
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:59:48 -0500, Goomba <Goom...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I also would have assumed that everyone everywhere
>> always saw the very same header information....?
>
> Aren't you one of the people who claim to have been on the internet
> since the beginning of time? Figure it out.
>> What exactly does this say about my character, sf?
>
> I think you've already guessed.
You seem to imagine I've claimed many things. I'd love to see you back
these claims up with proof?
IMO, you're making yourself appear more and more foolish.
frie...@zoocrewphoto.com
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:08:38 -0600, Stu <reci...@foodforu.ca> wrote:
> >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 10:11:34 -0800, sf <sf.use...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> >-->On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:59:55 -0600, Stu <reci...@foodforu.ca> wrote:
> >-->
> >-->>People will find out who you are if they take the time to dig.
> >-->
> >-->Let them dig. It will show what kind of a person they really are.
> >-->
> >-->For those who haven't put themselves out there and are exposed by
> >-->their "friends", it's a nasty kick in the chops.
>
> >Obviously they're not your friends then
>
> This thread wasn't about me. It was about someone who doesn't put
> their name out there and was exposed by someone who was just trying to
> be chummy and folksy. It was a momentary lapse of judgment. I just
> want people to think twice before they post the real names they use
> via email.
>
As somebody who has my name and phone number on my website, and has
never bothered to hide my name, I can tell y ou that a lot of people
don't see a problem with using a real name, and would not have
considered it a lapse of judgment to address somebody by name if they
know the name.
I actually tend to distrust people who don't use a name, because they
aren't accountable like those who use their real names. When I get
emails from anoymous addresses that might be business related, I will
usually do a search online and find something for them, whether it be
a forum, website, usenet, facebook, etc.
Yes, I know my name doesn't show up on these posts normally. It is not
by my choice. I used to post via free agent, and it listed my name
next to my email address. And I had a sig file with my name and
website. My ISP cancelled usenet service, and I tend to come and go
with usenet, so it hasn't been worth it to go to a paid service. So, I
post via google, which doesn't include my name. And I simply don't
sign my posts very often. I'm so used to the sig file in email, that I
never have to do it.
So, this time, I'll sign my post.
Meghan Noecker and the Zoo Crew (Chase, Jay Jay, Quinn, and Sassy Taz)
www.zoocrewphoto.com
frie...@zoocrewphoto.com
> PeterL wrote:
> > "~misfit~" <sore_n_ha...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote in news:heknh7$l9k$1
Well, how often is that preference posted? I've been on this group off
and on for several years, yet this is the first I have seen the sf
doesn't want her name posted. This is also the first time that I knew
sf is a she.
So, had I received a private email or at some time, saw a header with
the real name, how would I have known that it was not supposed to be
used? If somebody does not want their name used, then they should tell
people on the email when they use their name that they don't want it
used.
For many of us, our name online is no big deal, so this whole issue is
a non-issue to us. I've been online since 1993, and using my real name
the whole time. I've changed email addresses a couple times, but I've
had this one since 1998.
I've even had a couple people show up at my house, unannounced, after
responding to craigslist ads. The one was a little creepy, but it's
not a big deal. If somebody wanted to find me to hurt me they could.
And any house can get robbed, even without info being posted on the
web.
I've met several people in person after meeting them online, mostly
through usenet and mailing lists. One was a real creep, and I'm glad I
didn't meet him alone. He seemed really nice online and over the
phone. But that hasn't stopped me from meeting several other really
nice people. I am just as likely to meet a dangerous person at work as
I am online.
frie...@zoocrewphoto.com
> Think about it stu. sf is only two letters. It takes a lot more
> effort to remember my name and type it. So, what is their real intent
> when they do it? It's *not* a mistake when it happens. You're a big
> boy, so you can figure it out all by yourself.
>
Until this discussion, I would have assumed that sf was just a quickie
way of signing, and that it wasn't meant to hide a name. Just as I use
a sig file with my email so that I don't have to type it for every
post. Not everybody knows WHY you don't post your name.
I'll give a real world example. I work in a grocery store. We get
people every day who ask for a bag to put their food in BEFORE they
have paid (they plan to keep shopping). While some people intend to
steal the food and know they need to make it look like they paid,
there are also honest people that never thought of that and just
wanted an easier way to carry it.
Not everybody who does something that upsets you is doing it to upset
you.
Geez, I got chewed out out for saying I didn't like strangers using my
name when I am working. Only because some people use it to have power
over me. But I do understand that most people don't mean it that way,
and if I know them as regulars, or they say it in a nice way, I have
no problem with it all.
Please understand that not everybody has the intent that you assume
they have.
PeterL
news:80e6d950-1cba-4006...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
Gidday Meghan, up till now I only knew of Fresian cows :-)
Nice lookin' ponies, them Fresians.
Stu
(snippy)
-->Think about it stu. sf is only two letters. It takes a lot more
-->effort to remember my name and type it. So, what is their real intent
-->when they do it? It's *not* a mistake when it happens. You're a big
-->boy, so you can figure it out all by yourself.
I didn't know a thing about you before, but now because of the comment above I
can surmise that you're a condescending middle aged female.
Beea
"Stu" <rec...@foodforu.ca> wrote in message
news:593tg5lvmbimhff15...@4ax.com...
Add "control freak" and "ex-teacher" and you would be correct. Can you
just imagine your kids being educated by this?
Bob Muncie
All that text, and still no point.
How about not posting names unless it's been okay'd?
Is that clear enough for you?
Bob Muncie
Do you understand the concept of "blah, blah, blah" ?
Bob Muncie
Sock much?
sf
Well, you can rest easy. You'll never find a mate of any type to
produce anything by.
Stu
-->On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:32:50 -0500, "Beea" <b...@honey.org> wrote:
-->
-->>
-->>"Stu" <rec...@foodforu.ca> wrote in message
-->>news:593tg5lvmbimhff15...@4ax.com...
-->>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 20:11:27 -0800, sf <sf.u...@geemail.com> wrote:
-->>>
-->>>
-->>> (snippy)
-->>>
-->>> -->Think about it stu. sf is only two letters. It takes a lot more
-->>> -->effort to remember my name and type it. So, what is their real intent
-->>> -->when they do it? It's *not* a mistake when it happens. You're a big
-->>> -->boy, so you can figure it out all by yourself.
-->>>
-->>>
-->>> I didn't know a thing about you before, but now because of the comment
-->>> above I
-->>> can surmise that you're a condescending middle aged female.
-->>
-->>Add "control freak" and "ex-teacher" and you would be correct. Can you
-->>just imagine your kids being educated by this?
-->>
-->Well, you can rest easy. You'll never find a mate of any type to
-->produce anything by.
.. and you taught kids did you, how many are scarred for life I wonder.
sf
All of them.
blake murphy
> "~misfit~" <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote in message
> news:heknh7$l9k$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Somewhere on teh intarwebs sf wrote:
>>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:38:20 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>>> <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My newsreader, Xnews, consistently displays "sf" in all the headers.
>>>
>>> I don't have my real name in there anymore. I'm over being honest
>>> about who I am. Thanks.
>>
>> This from the person who started in on me with an attitude because the
>> 'from' field in my posts doesn't have a real-sounding name.
>>
>> From the way this thread turned out it's probably best that you're not
>> honest about who you are... even to yourself.
>> --
>
> You're an asshole, dood.
but he's 'honest'! these days, that seems to make everything o.k.
your pal,
blake