Your board warns against using fake email addresses, but fails to offer the option of not receiving email, thus in effect requiring us to use fake email addresses if we don't want email. I don't want to want to have to enter a fake email address, but I *really* don't want to get email. Should I just continue entering a fake email address? Or could you modify the board to allow no email address? Thanks.

-- benoit (foo@bar.com), April 17, 2000

Answers

yoo hoo anybody home

-- benoit (foo@bar.com), April 21, 2000.

When you ask a question, ensure that "Notify Me of Responses" isn't ticked.

-- Alan Gibson (Alan@snibgo.com), April 22, 2000.

If you don't want to follow the rules and leave your _correct_ email address then don't leave a message. Personally I would hope that the board maintainers would routinely check the validity of the addresses and take steps to bar those who refuse to abide by the rules.

Just another perspective.

Bill Cook

PS I don't like juke mail but I don't use a fake mail address. I don't like junk phone calls but I leave my number listed. I do maintain large trash cans and utilize email filters. Go ahead waste an electron, postage stamp or what have you. And if you call with an unsolicited ad be prepared to have the phone slamed in your ear. BC

-- Bill Cook (billc@wcook.com), April 22, 2000.

Hi Bill, thanks for the incredibly rude, retarded, and unhelpful answer. People, gotta love em!

I have a good reason for not wanting email or giving my email address out. Since the maintainers of this forum are entirely unresponsive, I am forced to continue using a fake email address. Fine.

-- benoit (foo@bar.com), April 24, 2000.

Speaking of rude, retarded, and unhelpful:

Benoit,

No one is forcing you to interact through this forum. Believe it or not, the universe doesn't revolve about you or your desires. It seems to me that you should play by the rules, or simply not play. It's a pretty minor rule. You may have what you consider to be good reasons, the forum maintainers have their own. In this case their rules should overrule your desires, since it's their forum and they make the rules. If it were up to me, the first time anyone wanted to post, a valid email would be required by emailing them a password which would then be required to make posts to the forum. It wouldn't be perfect, but would at least require banned individuals to go to the time & trouble of securing additional email addresses just to be annoying. You could easily use a free email provider's account like hotmail or another service. The only real motivation for not giving out a valid email address is to be free to say anything you like without having to risk censure from others who can flood your email with their displeasure. Instead, you force anyone who objects to your sometimes annoying behavior to stoop to the same level and chastise you in public. Just where do YOU, of all people, get off calling others rude, retarded, or unhelpful? You strike me as an at times particularly unpleasant individual. The type that would likely eventually get struck for real in an actual social situation. Or perhaps should have been, at least until they learned some manners? It's an unfortunate failing on the bahalf of some that they failed to learn manners in kindergarten like everyone else.

Personally, I'm also sick of less than civil jerks who feel they can say anything they like in a "public" forum with no fear of reprisals. Anonymity, like the effect of alcohol on some people, often allows too many people to drop the curtain of civility they employ in most other social situations. I guarantee most internet loud mouths wouldn't dare be so bold in person. Requiring an email address is obviously a simple, but flawed, way of helping maintain the civility one is expected to employ in day to day social situations. Insulting someone via text in a forum can be just as hurtful as doing it in person, but is surely the coward's way out. People should at least be brave enough to put their full name to their opinions. When they don't, the likely conclusion is that they're too ashamed of what they write... This isn't the middle ages and the Spanish Inquisition has long faded away.

Email addresses aren't really the answer. What we need are permanent unscammable combined Email/IP addresses assigned to INDIVIDUALS. Then when someone's behavior is felt to be out of bounds in a particular venue they can simply be added to a list of invalid IPs and not be allowed post to a forum until they "grow up" and "learn to play nice with others..." or be well and truly bombarded by mails from those who feel their behavior is unwelcome. If you can't play nice, then you should sit on the sidelines and watch until you mature a bit. You deserve to get as good as you occasionally dish out! Without societal feedback there can be no social reform and anonymity can easily be the tool of the small minded rather than the weapon of the socially conscious.

In short, give your email -or at least an email, quit insulting others whose views differ from your own, and do the world a favor and try maturing a little. You might look back one day, and be the better for it.

-- Gerald M. Payne (gmp@francomm.com), April 24, 2000.

I fail to see were I said anything rude, I know that I was informed and I am saddened you did not find it helpful.

Your are aware, I suppose, that bar.com is indeed a registered URL and much to my surprise there is a mail box "foo". at it. I don't know why, there is. So what you are doing is spamming that mail box.

Now I call that rude, I am sure it was done because your are uninformed and I assure yout that it is not helpful.

Bill Cook

-- Bill Cook (billc@wcook.com), April 24, 2000.

Hi Gerald, I'm impressed that you turned a simple question into an opportunity for petty personal attack. I simply asked if forum could be modified to accomodate people who do not wish to receive email. That's it. Somehow, you interpret this as an assertion that the world revolves around me and my desires. How you read this kind of thinking into my simple question defies understanding. What motivates you to misattribute my motives and make personal attacks is beyond comprehension, I won't bother trying to guess. The incredible thing is that your own message complains about "less than civil jerks". Please take a long look in the mirror, Gerald, and reconsider what you have accused me of. Your attitude sickens and disgusts me.

-- benoit (foo@bar.com), April 25, 2000.

A plea: Could people please confine remarks to the question of hand -- Here it is again.

"Your board warns against using fake email addresses, but fails to offer the option of not receiving email, thus in effect requiring us to use fake email addresses if we don't want email. I don't want to want to have to enter a fake email address, but I *really* don't want to get email. Should I just continue entering a fake email address? Or could you modify the board to allow no email address? Thanks. "

-- benoit (foo@bar.com), April 25, 2000.

Benot: It won't be changed. Just keep on truckin', no worries. Relaaax. Nobody cares about email, forget about it. Just talk cameras!

Gerald: Your message told Benoit to grow up, maybe you should take your own advice before insulting others with this kind of garbage? Take this kind of talk elsewhere please!! Just talk cameras!

-- M. Kaye (mikekaye@klinzhai.evolve.com), April 25, 2000.

Benoit & Mike,

I think both your replies were incredibly ironic.

My post was the direct result of Benoit terming someone else's reply to his post "rude, retarded, and unhelpful". It was simply another participant's opinion, one likely shared by others who feel that hiding behind pseudonyms or false emails while insulting others is truly contemptable. I believe in free speech, but no one guaranteed anonymous invective. I also strongly believe in men and women of good conscience being unafraid to stand behind what they say in public, or public forums.

My motivation was only to return to Benoit some of what he so easily doles out, but is so offended by when directed at him. I often enjoy his posts in this forum, but find the occasional insults he makes while hiding behind a facetious email address beneath contempt. The only way to communicate one's displeasure with someone with a bogus email is to do so in public.

Stating that your reasons "force" YOU to violate a rule indicates your belief that your reasons and rights outweigh the rights of those who agree to the rule. It's like saying you had to speed because you woke up late. Try it on a policeman. It's not much of a deduction to make the observation that such a person is the type who feels the world must revolve about them since their reasons, motivations and needs are paramount.

If I've offended anyone who doesn't feel the necessity to attack others out of hand, I whole heartedly apologize. Anyone who has read my posts to this forum, or cares to search for them, will see that I've never admonished anyone who didn't feel the need to insult others. My apologies to anyone offended by my actions, but I am tired of the "rude, retarded, and unhelpful"(his words, not mine) statements the "Benoits" of this world so casually fling forth and especially annoyed by his outrage when the same is done to him.

-- Gerald M. Payne (gmp@francomm.com), April 26, 2000.

Gerald, don't be hypocrite. You talk like it is ok to insult people because you list your email, It is not. Email or no it makes no difference, you don't talk to people like that. You want to teach him a lesson, that does not make it ok to insult. You lower yourself when you say this kind of thing. Get that chip of your shoulder, do the right thing and apologize. How can you complain about other peoples manners when you are worse than him yourself? It makes no sense.

-- M. Kaye (mikekaye@klinzhai.evolve.com), April 26, 2000.

Mike, Is it appropriate for Benoit to say my intitial response was rude? I only said I thought that the rules should be abided by and that the maintainers should enforce them. Lest you think that I don't know what I am talking about I have maintained and helped in the maintaining of communications boards for nearly 20 years (maybe more). They all have rules and I beleive that the rules should be lived with and enforced or changed. Until they are changed I will live with them (and by them).

Is all right for Benoit to suggest that I am retarded? Indeed I wonder if Benoit has ever worked with or interacted with individuals who are retarded. One of my vocations brings in daily contacted with individuals who are retarded including Downs syndrome individuals. What characterizes them all is that the they are profoundly simple and loving. I have never met one who had a rapier like tongue that Benoit demonstrates.

Finally, and perhaps more important, does Benoit have the right to use a false address that he knows belongs to someone else? How would you like it if he took your address and used it in some sleazy porno site? I happen to know of an individual who had this happen (I am not saying Benoit did it). He recieved copious amounts of email soliciting him for any number of perverted activities. The email address was on a machine belonging to his employer (a Catholic diocese) and it was read by the employer. He darn near lost his job. Fortunately he was able to demonstrate that he had had his identity stolen. That is what Benoit is doing - stealing someones identity. If he must use a false address then why not one that is unlikely in the extreme to be valid such as:

benoit@idontwantemail.ispam.ass

-- Bill Cook (billc@wcook.com), April 26, 2000.

Hey Bill, I apologize, I didn't understand that you reply was sincere. Let me explain, maybe then we can understand each other. and hopefully you can forgive me. Read my initial question again first. You see in the question itself I acknowledge that 1) using a fake email address was less than ideal. 2) I acknowledge that I did not wish to continue using a fake email address. 3) I acknowledged that it was "against the rules" and asked if the system could be changed so deciding not to receive email didn't break the rules. 4) I ask the forum maintainers for advice on how to proceed, wanting to do the right thing.

Then I see your reply that simply criticises me for the 3 things I acknowledge are bad, and I think, wow this guy is trying to be smart and nasty, he is criticising me for the very three things I acknowledge as bad in my question, without even addressing my question at hand, whether the board can be changed to accomodate people who do not wish to receive email, so that none of the things acknowledged as bad are even an issue. This is why I called your reply these things. At the time I couldn't possibly see how it could be a sincere reply. It's like someone asking if cell phones could someday have a vibrate feature on their cell phone to avoid annoying others during theatre performances, and the reply is, "You are a jerk for bringing your cell phone in, don't you know they annoy others? They should boot everyone who brings one in!" It's frustrating because it feels like the respondant hasn't heard your question at all. Now you understand?

Please note that the only reason given for requiring a real email address is to avoid bouncing email, and "technical problems". No where is it stated that the purpose is to avoid anonymous posters. Therefore it is not unreasonable for me to ask if say a little check box could be added to avoid getting email everytime someone replies to your message. Even if the maintainers have an interest in avoiding anonymous posters, then they could still have this check box, require registration of names as on other forums, and yet still give people the option to avoid getting tons of email as people reply. The email feature is neat, but it might be nice if people could turn it off at will. To me, receiving email and registering a particular legitimate email address are TWO SEPERATE ISSUES. We all know what the current system is, the question is whether it can be changed to accomodate all interests at hand. If not fine. Nowhere does my message insist that things be done a certain way, or that things be changed, it simply asks for possibilities, and how to proceed.

I don't have much to offer Gerald's attempts to demonize me, except to say it is ironic to complain about insults, by yourself giving even more insults than the message you complain about. Kind of like protesting swearing by saying "hey stop f!@#$ swearing!!" Good one... :)

-- benoit (noemail@noemail.com), April 26, 2000.

Benoit,

I think I've already stated my reasons for making my point the way that I did. If I struck a chord with you, or upset you, then it certainly seems to have had the desired effect of persuading you to reconsider your admittedly illconsidered attack on Bill's opinion.

I respect the vast majority of your posts in the forum, but don't care for your occasional rudeness. I'm sorry that I didn't find a higher handed way to do it, but crying because I did to you as you did to another is silly. I'll apologize for my method, but not the result. Lick your wounds, and consider it a free lesson in social discourse. I'll leave the final word to you as I currently have no more time to be bothered trading petty vagaries.

-- Gerald M. Payne (gmp@francomm.com), April 26, 2000.

Gerald, your tantrum served only as a grotesque display of hypocrisy -- Bitterly protesting uncivil messages while hurling more abuse in your own. Amazingly, you think misattributing my motives and insulting me served some productive purpose... Perhaps you should look in the mirror and take that lesson in social discourse you mention. People in glass houses...

Hint: Next time Gerald, don't forget your medication. :)

-- benoit (fakeemail@requiredbyforum.com), April 26, 2000.