Dont you find it odd...

Forums: Internet
Email this Topic • Print this Page

...that nowhere on the internet is there even a single site that allows posting on a forum or instant messenger where you can post whatever without a screen name (handle), password, or e-mail address to be displayed or needed to post?

And isnt it odd that there is no site offering the sending and receiving of e-mail anonymously without an "etc." on the left side of the at etc. dot com part or the whole etc. at etc. dot come part?

Like with phones... You can call someone and have it to where the phone number wont show up on another's caller ID. It should be an option for that with e-mail.

As for forum and messenger sites, dont you think in today's internet society there should be sites with an actual total anonymous option? Why are designers of websites and messengers all following the usual program? Is something or somebody forcing them to be similar to the next?

If they ever made sites like being suggested they should be called AA non-member sites. AA is for alternative anonymous. On such sites you are not a member, but may post. Shouldnt have been more complex than that from the get-go on sites. Getting us to conform to have more than one name in society is as having the number of disarray.

Matter of fact, there needs to be an additional internet. Call it Internet A. A is for either Anonymous or Alternative: where this additional internet hosts only those kinds of AA non-member sites and has the whole optional anonymous e-mail array set up. It would hinder e-stalkers (they'd be blinded as to who is who. They even wouldnt be able to know if it's the same person making a thread/post to where they might continue bitchin' about something said from ago towards a person) and keep others from somehow coming in the name of what would be your e-mail or handle.

Society's social interaction through the net could be better. Just think... when you're out in public, socializing by exchanging brief comments and questions with stangers, you normally wouldnt ask for their name or name they go by. Nor do they wear tags with any names on it. And neither do you. Why shouldnt it have been more like that on the internet already?

Face it, ppl on this current internet are not truely reflecting society with the fear over their heads that the results of their finger tip actions are by a log that can be traced to a location. There are things you would say to a person, in person, that you wouldnt say to that person on the net. And there are things you wouldnt say to a person, in person, that you would say to that person on the net. There would be a realer society if there ever would be an additional Internet A. Even more real if it doesnt even keep a log that can lead to a location.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 823 • Replies: 7

No top replies

Re: Dont you find it odd...

Busma wrote:

...that nowhere on the internet is there even a single site that allows posting on a forum or instant messenger where you can post whatever without a screen name (handle), password, or e-mail address to be displayed or needed to post?

That's not true. There are hundreds of thousands.

Quote:

And isnt it odd that there is no site offering the sending and receiving of e-mail anonymously without an "etc." on the left side of the at etc. dot com part or the whole etc. at etc. dot come part?

Yes, there are. I made one the 5th week I was on the internet and used it to send prank emails.

Quote:

Like with phones... You can call someone and have it to where the phone number wont show up on another's caller ID. It should be an option for that with e-mail.

It is. And I get spam with blank sender headers all the time.

Quote:

As for forum and messenger sites, dont you think in today's internet society there should be sites with an actual total anonymous option? Why are designers of websites and messengers all following the usual program? Is something or somebody forcing them to be similar to the next?

I saw a great reason why just this week. It was an argument on a site that didn't require any ID. So "Anonymous" was arguing with other users named "Anonymous".

In the middle of this argument involving a bunch of them someone (named "Anonymous") posted: "I agree with Anonymous!" and it made me laugh.

The reason it was funny is one reason it is uncommon but the biggest reason is that the anonymity leads people to abuse the system.

I took my email page down because of spammers, and ended up keeping it only for myself. Abuse of the systems the site owners have to pay for is the biggest reasons against anonymity.

For example, without requiring a username, email and password then a forum has bots that post thousands of messages a day.

Requiring a login is a big step toward curbing the volume of automated junk.

0 Replies

Re: Dont you find it odd...

Busma wrote:

There are things you would say to a person, in person, that you wouldnt say to that person on the net. And there are things you wouldnt say to a person, in person, that you would say to that person on the net. There would be a realer society if there ever would be an additional Internet A. Even more real if it doesnt even keep a log that can lead to a location.

Ummm... Err.... If the 'net was totally anonymous then how would you know if you were saying something to the person you intended to say it to?

0 Replies

Re: Dont you find it odd...

fishin wrote:

Busma wrote:
There are things you would say to a person, in person, that you wouldnt say to that person on the net. And there are things you wouldnt say to a person, in person, that you would say to that person on the net. There would be a realer society if there ever would be an additional Internet A. Even more real if it doesnt even keep a log that can lead to a location.

Ummm... Err.... If the 'net was totally anonymous then how would you know if you were saying something to the person you intended to say it to?

Easy. Well all one would have to do to get the same person's attention, in an anonymous internet world, is by simply quoting a part or a whole to what was previously said in the very thread or from a previous thread into another thread. Like already on here how we can quote someone so others know whether or not you're talking to them. In an anonymous net world that can still be pulled off to where you can communicate with a person that you want to from what they had said from before without having to have been supplied with any screenname of their's.

0 Replies

Re: Dont you find it odd...

Robert Gentel wrote:

Busma wrote:
...that nowhere on the internet is there even a single site that allows posting on a forum or instant messenger where you can post whatever without a screen name (handle), password, or e-mail address to be displayed or needed to post?

That's not true. There are hundreds of thousands.

Quote:
And isnt it odd that there is no site offering the sending and receiving of e-mail anonymously without an "etc." on the left side of the at etc. dot com part or the whole etc. at etc. dot come part?

Yes, there are. I made one the 5th week I was on the internet and used it to send prank emails.

Quote:
Like with phones... You can call someone and have it to where the phone number wont show up on another's caller ID. It should be an option for that with e-mail.

It is. And I get spam with blank sender headers all the time.

Quote:
As for forum and messenger sites, dont you think in today's internet society there should be sites with an actual total anonymous option? Why are designers of websites and messengers all following the usual program? Is something or somebody forcing them to be similar to the next?

I saw a great reason why just this week. It was an argument on a site that didn't require any ID. So "Anonymous" was arguing with other users named "Anonymous".

In the middle of this argument involving a bunch of them someone (named "Anonymous") posted: "I agree with Anonymous!" and it made me laugh.

The reason it was funny is one reason it is uncommon but the biggest reason is that the anonymity leads people to abuse the system.

I took my email page down because of spammers, and ended up keeping it only for myself. Abuse of the systems the site owners have to pay for is the biggest reasons against anonymity.

For example, without requiring a username, email and password then a forum has bots that post thousands of messages a day.

Requiring a login is a big step toward curbing the volume of automated junk.

Um. There wouldnt be any automated junk if there is no log-in for a bot system/program of such to work. With a log-in it allows for programs to read fields and work in a structure with a site. Plus, there would prolly still be time delays between how many posts one can post in a certain amount of time. Thus that is what curbs the whole automated problem to most sites.

And like I said to the other about quoting... One can tell who is being referred to by quoting their post. So communication itself would still flow smoothly.

0 Replies

Re: Dont you find it odd...

Busma wrote:

Um. There wouldnt be any automated junk if there is no log-in for a bot system/program of such to work.

The bots aren't after logins. The bots want to post content.

The login is the deterrent to the bots as it allows you to group your defenses at the authentication point. So without them, yes there still would be bots and automated junk since the goal isn't logging in, but posting (and there'd still be posting in your internet).

Otherwise you need to do a CAPTCHA on every posting and that reduces the usability and thusly the use.

Which is why you've never heard of the hundreds of thousands of forums allowing anonymous posting even if they exist: they aren't popular in comparison to forums with a greater sense of identity.

Quote:

With a log-in it allows for programs to read fields and work in a structure with a site. Plus, there would prolly still be time delays between how many posts one can post in a certain amount of time.

You aren't thinking this through very well. If the posters are truly anonymous then you can't differentiate between their requests.

Look, I'm not saying it's impossible. It's just a lot harder and is pointless, which is why it is not common. It's not like everything you are talking about hasn't been tried. It's simply that it's been roundly rejected and I am explaining why.

The bottom line is that anonymity facilitates abuse, and because the abuse can be automated online identity and authentication are helpful security concepts about the web that resonate with individual users.

Everything you are talking about is already possible and available on the internet. It's just not very useful for most people.

Quote:

Thus that is what curbs the whole automated problem to most sites.

No, it is not. CAPTCHAS are. The flood control does very little (just make the bot use a list of proxy servers with a different IP for each post).

Quote:

And like I said to the other about quoting... One can tell who is being referred to by quoting their post. So communication itself would still flow smoothly.

Likewise you don't need names in real life. You can say "to the funny guy in the red hat" or "to the guy that said 'I want a burger'" too off line.

But the concept of names and identities offline serve a purpose that they serve online as well. You may think the lack of identity and names makes for better communication but most people don't. Which is why it is not popular.

Because like I said, there are plenty of anonymous social sites that downplay identity, there just aren't any real popular ones because it's not what most people want. They want some kind of identity at times, even if there is a separation from their real identity.

But everything you describe exists. The protocols support as much anonymity as is technically possible. Heck this forum software can allow guest posting at the click of a mouse. And anonymous email is perfectly possible but just not received well by most mail servers due to the spam it usually carries.

The reason it is not often as you describe is because people choose for it not to be for good reasons.

0 Replies

Re: Dont you find it odd...

Busma wrote:

fishin wrote:
Busma wrote:
There are things you would say to a person, in person, that you wouldnt say to that person on the net. And there are things you wouldnt say to a person, in person, that you would say to that person on the net. There would be a realer society if there ever would be an additional Internet A. Even more real if it doesnt even keep a log that can lead to a location.

Ummm... Err.... If the 'net was totally anonymous then how would you know if you were saying something to the person you intended to say it to?

Easy. Well all one would have to do to get the same person's attention, in an anonymous internet world, is by simply quoting a part or a whole to what was previously said in the very thread or from a previous thread into another thread. Like already on here how we can quote someone so others know whether or not you're talking to them. In an anonymous net world that can still be pulled off to where you can communicate with a person that you want to from what they had said from before without having to have been supplied with any screenname of their's.

I don't see that as very conductive for carrying on a useful conversation.

Person A posts something.
Person B quotes Person A and comments
Person C quotes Person B and comments

Is Person C also Person A? Or are they someone entirely different?

A system very much like what you describe is readily available - check out the "Rants & Raves" section on Craigslist. Every single post gets a unique identifier so you can't tell if you are having a discussion with one other person or 8. Pretty much every discussion disintigrates into insults and cursing within minutes and the place is filled with spam postings. I suppose that's why it isn't known for enlightening discussions.

0 Replies

Re: Dont you find it odd...

fishin wrote:

I don't see that as very conductive for carrying on a useful conversation.

Person A posts something.
Person B quotes Person A and comments
Person C quotes Person B and comments

Is Person C also Person A? Or are they someone entirely different?

it would be pretty funny though, to find out you'd been arguing with yourself for an hour or so, hopefully not until you'd already added the final, "go f**k yourself"

0 Replies

Dont you find it odd...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know