Quoted Text

New York State Assembly legislators have proposed for anonymous commenting to be banned. You will have to enter your real name to comment on the internet on any forum or social media website.

Read more: http://newsrescue.com/globalis.....guise/#ixzz2cwBdQyfc

I understand some people's dislike of the anonymous comments, but really, it is up to the individual sites to police what they are posting. There is a problem with anonymity on some of the political blogs with the same commenters posting under different names, political operatives pretending to be neutral, and so forth, but it is also the only way to get dissenting opinions out there. The legislators are doing the usual job of thinking they are doing good by taking away certain freedoms.
It annoys me when I read comments on some sites and they are full of personal attacks. I can quit reading them or complain to the management.
Does anyone remember when letters to the editor in local papers could be printed without the writer's name?
The thing that bothers me is that the lawmakers even think it is up to them to decide.
The reason I post anonymously on this site is because it doesn't really matter who I am, I'm a random Schenectady woman and my thoughts and opinions only have the value a reader wants to give them, the same as anybody else. Why would I attach a name, when that could expose people in my family to unwanted attention? Plus you never know what sort of weirdos are out there.

Why would they want to be anonymous? Lets be real- NY officials aren't corrupt and never would they target anyone who spoke out, nor are our police dishonest, everrrrr! And no one would ever want retribution for anyone's comments, ever. Right?

Of course the founding fathers never wrote things under pen names in papers or leaflets, did they? Nahhhh. maybe the European and Middle Eastern ones didn't...

Quoted from Madam X

Why would I attach a name, when that could expose people in my family to unwanted attention? Plus you never know what sort of weirdos are out there.

They need your name so they can attack your reputation and FOIA for every legal matter you've ever been involved in.  Whether a divorce, real estate purchase, tax delinquencies, or the high school you attended.  Anything in an attempt to destroy the reputation of those that criticize government or government officials.  They have trouble attacking the credibility of the hacker Anonymous because they can't put a face on him/her/them.  If they knew exactly who they were, they could dig up every thing imaginable on them, as well as make stuff up, and flash unflattering pictures of them on the tv news, while political pundits destroy their credibility.  The growing popularity of people like Anonymous has to be stopped. The government doesn't like to be eavesdropped on, they don't like getting embarrassed by a group of people that they cannot destroy publicly.

They are fine with a Rush Limbaugh, because they can easily attack him.  They can destroy him if he steps too far out of line.  With anonymous opinions, they can not use the tactic of polarizing and destroying the credibility of the source.  Destroying the messenger is how the state stops the spread of a message.

don't be fooled here folks........they don't need a name......they have YOUR IP ADDRESS!!!

It is just stupid legislation that clearly is NOT necessary!!!

they've already gotcha covered!!

Such a law would drive the nayboobs back under the rocks.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Such a law would drive the nayboobs back under the rocks.

I guess you support such a law.   I guess you support the government dictatorship dictating what PRIVATE people/groups. running PRIVATE webistes/board, can do, right?  

It really hurts to see people speak the truth, doesn't it, especially when you have not a teeny weeny shred of evidence to support what you say.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Such a law would drive the nayboobs back under the rocks.

And nobody left except the state worshipers slapping each other on the back bragging about what a great job they are doing engineering society, and destroying anybody that disagrees.  The totalitarian utopia.

They want to tamp down criticism of the big government agenda, pure and simple.

ps- don't forget how "liberal" they are when it comes to free speech. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Quoted from CICERO

And nobody left except the state worshipers slapping each other on the back bragging about what a great job they are doing engineering society, and destroying anybody that disagrees.  The totalitarian utopia.

I am not saying that I support the law.  But we all know the cowards who hide behind their screen names on this website while they spread their negativity and try to destroy anybody who disagrees with them.  Those folks are Nayboobs.  

Does this mean that I will have to actually admit that I am Keyser Soze?

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

I am not saying that I support the law.  But we all know the cowards who hide behind their screen names on this website while they spread their negativity and try to destroy anybody who disagrees with them.  Those folks are Nayboobs.  

So do you support the law or not??? Simple question here.

And would you support a law that makes you wear a name tag(with your name on it) with the name of the person/s you voted for, around your neck on election day for all to see? How about one for what religion  you are? How about one that states how much money you make a year and how much you pay in taxes? How about one that states where  you live?

Don't you see where this is going???????

And should these laws be enforced for only those who disagree with the present government system?

It appears that folks are looking for MORE invasion of privacy. Looks like it isn't enough that they (the government) tracks our every move....reading our email....following our IP'S all over the net........control our cars.......dictates our medical care........follows our purchases via debit/credit card......pay taxes based on our social security#.............getting a free feel at airports...........YUP....that's what we need is MORE transparency!!!

OMG!!!

Funny how folks like you agree/support with making the 'citizens' transparent....when our government is anything BUT THAT!!!

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

I am not saying that I support the law.  But we all know the cowards who hide behind their screen names on this website while they spread their negativity and try to destroy anybody who disagrees with them.  Those folks are Nayboobs.  

OK fellow board members, everyone, ask DV WHY is it that HE uses a screen name other than his own real name?  

I don't know how exactly we board members became aware of the who behind the screen name he uses.  Maybe he said something and some members realized who he is.  Maybe he actually identified himself, perhaps not with his name but perhaps referencing his capacity in the town, or something.

But I do find it interesting that someone who holds these various positions in the town and church and whatever, would actually want to be identified when that person speaks so unintelligently, especially making statements that are totally untrue.  Can you imagine the headlines in the newspaper "Town official lies."

But then again, maybe the statements made via posted here or other sites are just a means of hoping that someone in the party will give him a high paid no-show job based solely on the constant shaking of the pom poms.  I mean really, that's all that dems in the city/county/plex do.  They make glowing statements and NEVER EVER will address the overwhelming EVIDENCE to the contrary.   Best example is McCheese in the city talking so glowingly of his taxpayer funding assessed real estate homeselling program, he and his cronies appear on King Philips taxpayer funded TV channel, stating oh so many houses have been sold or are under contract, however, the EVDIENCE based on official deed records shows far fewer homes sold than they talk about.  

Yep, the dems work together, identified or not, they spew babble with no evidence to support what they say.

[quote=12]



OK fellow board members, everyone, ask DV WHY is it that HE uses a screen name other than his own real name?  

I don't know how exactly we board members became aware of the who behind the screen name he uses.  Maybe he said something and some members realized who he is.  Maybe he actually identified himself, perhaps not with his name but perhaps referencing his capacity in the town, or something.

But I do find it interesting that someone who holds these various positions in the town and church and whatever, would actually want to be identified when that person speaks so unintelligently, especially making statements that are totally untrue.  Can you imagine the headlines in the newspaper "Town official lies."

But then again, maybe the statements made via posted here or other sites are just a means of hoping that someone in the party will give him a high paid no-show job based solely on the constant shaking of the pom poms.  I mean really, that's all that dems in the city/county/plex do.  They make glowing statements and NEVER EVER will address the overwhelming EVIDENCE to the contrary.   Best example is McCheese in the city talking so glowingly of his taxpayer funding assessed real estate homeselling program, he and his cronies appear on King Philips taxpayer funded TV channel, stating oh so many houses have been sold or are under contract, however, the EVDIENCE based on official deed records shows far fewer homes sold than they talk about.  

Yep, the dems work together, identified or not, they spew babble with no evidence to support what they say.
[quote]

the point here mc1 is ..... is this 'really' who you 'think' it is??? don't really know for sure. However....the government can find out in a heartbeat just by tracing the IP address.