In defense...

of anonymous blog comments:

In real life, some people's views count more than others. You concentrate on who is saying something, not what they're saying. It's very easy to dismiss, perhaps before they've even said a word.

We see this all the time in say, politics, the workplace or the classroom. One person can present views, which are summarily rejected, perhaps because of who is speaking. Maybe we don't like their physical looks, or they have a background, or for whatever reason, we just don't understand what they are saying. Instead of evaluating on what is said, we evaluate the credibility of the speaker.

Later, a new face can present essentially the same argument, and it is more accepted because the person delivering the message, for whatever reason, is viewed with respect. That's human nature to trust or distrust the messenger, and I don't think it will change soon.

The Internet, however, opens up the world. Lots more things can be accessed. It's like a great public library: if you know what you're looking for and where to find the good stuff, the world is your playground, so to speak. Sure there are risks of playing in a bigger world, but the potential to benefit is also great.

Everybody gets to choose. Here, there are no comments allowed at all. I don't want slurs or wisecracks, and I miss out on the feedback from what I'm thinking and choosing to share. Oh well. I'm not looking to keep readers at my blog for extended times after they've read my thoughts. I'm not looking for your pity or praise.

The first impulse, when you've read something you believe is rude or uncomfortable, is to attack the writer. If they're anonymous, more the better. They should rot somewhere, nevermind responding to what about their comment has upset you so. It's human nature to fear people who don't automatically sign onto our thoughts, and upsetting to think not everyone views the same set of facts exactly as we do. I think you can see this in the mature national discussion we are having right now regarding the future of our country, America.

Some day, this online public library will be the better for getting past the presentations and having an honest exchange of views and general information sharing. The more voices we listen to, even if their thoughts and experiences are not necessarily incorporated into our course of action, the better. I read somewhere that better than physical torture, more effective, is the ability to get someone to want to talk.

If we can have the flexibility to see other points of view, not just judge from our own circumstances, we might move to take positive actions that will bring effective compromise in the future. Forcing new technologies to fit past ways, keeping the same playing fields, is short sighted and limiting. It's human nature though, we cling to the familiar ways at the expense of growth.

---

Another rule that some apply, I don't, is that you can't edit or delete posts without notifying your readers. There is usually a virtuous spin given on keeping up material, as though all deletions are corrections. Or, you could use this to your advantage. Unlike a newspaper that physically stays around, here you can put up things for regular readers and then take them down. Again, why should there be one set of rules that governs all blogs? We should each determine, and enforce, our own policies and not be so sure that our way of running things is the only way, or the most noble. That is a rejection of the possibilities something new offers, falling back into old ways and forcing them on the new and different technologies and voices.

(If this doesn't make sense to you, or you disagree with me, that's ok too.)