Anonymity

StroppyChops · Post by **StroppyChops** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:18 pm

Jacobincambodia wrote:I'm less likely to threaten someone on here since I'm obviously not anonymous

Conversely, IF you're relatively known, even if just by reputation, threatening someone online carries a lot of weight. The one time I threatened someone 'over there' with a personal encounter, his drinking buddies told him it was time to back away quietly. I never claim to be a saint, most know I'm an ex-con. I have a very long fuse, but like all men there ARE certain triggers. I'm working on it.

Joon · Post by **Joon** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:20 pm

Jacobincambodia wrote:Right, some things should remain private. You have to be very careful about what you post online especially with the perverts out there. Thinking about my family...And yes, I'm less likely to threaten someone on here since I'm obviously not anonymous . But I think it's safe to say that if you are a different person to different people, isn't that considered two-faced? Maybe I don't understand what that word means.

Nope. Two-faced would be presenting a sympathizing face to a person and backstabbing/badmouthing that same person. Two-faced would be preaching fidelity and condemning adultery while having multiple love affairs at the same time.

Presenting a different facet of one's personality to different people just means that not everybody is ready and open to accept and understand the WHOLE you.

What the "anonymity" of Internet discussion has taught me is to focus on a person's reasoning, thoughts, ideas and opinions without taking into account gender, age, race, professions, and so on.

StroppyChops · Post by **StroppyChops** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:22 pm

General Mackevili wrote:
Jacobincambodia wrote:That's retarded.
Maybe you might want to volunteer at a center for disabled children in the future. You've now used the word "retarded" in a way that some people would frown upon.

You might find that's a cultural difference. In Oz 'retarded' is not necessarily viewed as being 'like a retard'. It's more 'limited' - as in a fire retardation blanket. But it's a fair point in a multicultural society. Jacob, don't be retarded!

Joon · Post by **Joon** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:29 pm

StroppyChops wrote:
Jacobincambodia wrote:I'm less likely to threaten someone on here since I'm obviously not anonymous
Conversely, IF you're relatively known, even if just by reputation, threatening someone online carries a lot of weight. The one time I threatened someone 'over there' with a personal encounter, his drinking buddies told him it was time to back away quietly. I never claim to be a saint, most know I'm an ex-con. I have a very long fuse, but like all men there ARE certain triggers. I'm working on it.

Funny, I genuinely requested someone "over there" for a meet-up to discuss the points we were arguing about on the forums and he/she assumed I wanted to beat the crap out of him/her.

I guess, "anonymity" backfired in my case!

Jacobincambodia · Post by **Jacobincambodia** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:29 pm

General Mackevili wrote:
Jacobincambodia wrote:
That's retarded.
Maybe you might want to volunteer at a center for disabled children in the future.

You've now used the word "retarded" in a way that some people would frown upon. It definitely wouldn't help you land a position at a center for disabled children if this post followed you around by your real name for eternity.

(Just an example of one of the billion reasons to respect your own privacy, and use it when you can. I have nothing against that word being used like that, fwiw.)

I can think of numerous ways to use a fun alias online which has nothing to do with covering up bad behaviour, and LTO's was a perfect example.

It has more to do with others than it has to do with one's self.

Yeah, good point! You got me thinking, though. I went and looked up retarded in the dictionary. There is an obvious definition but there is a other entry for stupid or foolish. Sorry if the use of that word was offensive to anyone. That wasn't my intent.

StroppyChops · Post by **StroppyChops** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:31 pm

Given that Oz is, in my view, far more politically correct than many other western countries, it's unlikely you'd hear an education Aussie using 'retarded' in the sense of a person with a disability.

Jacobincambodia · Post by **Jacobincambodia** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:32 pm

StroppyChops wrote:
Jacobincambodia wrote:I'm less likely to threaten someone on here since I'm obviously not anonymous
Conversely, IF you're relatively known, even if just by reputation, threatening someone online carries a lot of weight. The one time I threatened someone 'over there' with a personal encounter, his drinking buddies told him it was time to back away quietly. I never claim to be a saint, most know I'm an ex-con. I have a very long fuse, but like all men there ARE certain triggers. I'm working on it.

Yeah, true!

ali baba · Post by **ali baba** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 6:50 pm

Garry.Crabtree wrote:Not sure you should either, it should be referred to as children with disabilities, not disabled children.

You should always emphasize the "person" first and "disability" second.

The correct term is cripple. All the euphemisms are inaccurate in one way or another. To disable means to damage or alter something so that it can no longer be used; so it doesn't apply to birth defects. Handicap is something that people acquire voluntarily.

I think some of those PC terms go too far. Someone once told me that 'mixed race' is offensive and we should use the term 'dual heritage'. I found this ridiculous as we are all of dual heritage except for Jesus who was the result of a virgin birth.

StroppyChops · Post by **StroppyChops** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:03 pm

ali baba wrote:
Garry.Crabtree wrote:Not sure you should either, it should be referred to as children with disabilities, not disabled children.

You should always emphasize the "person" first and "disability" second.
The correct term is cripple. All the euphemisms are inaccurate in one way or another. To disable means to damage or alter something so that it can no longer be used; so it doesn't apply to birth defects. Handicap is something that people acquire voluntarily.

I think some of those PC terms go too far. Someone once told me that 'mixed race' is offensive and we should use the term 'dual heritage'. I found this ridiculous as we are all of dual heritage except for Jesus who was the result of a virgin birth.

Australian natives really struggled with their sense of identity when 'indigenous' and 'aborigine' started being used globally, rather than just then specifically. Not mockery, just a comment, as I have a close affinity with them.

Cowshed Cowboy · Post by **Cowshed Cowboy** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:41 pm

ali baba wrote:
Garry.Crabtree wrote:Not sure you should either, it should be referred to as children with disabilities, not disabled children.

You should always emphasize the "person" first and "disability" second.
The correct term is cripple. All the euphemisms are inaccurate in one way or another. To disable means to damage or alter something so that it can no longer be used; so it doesn't apply to birth defects. Handicap is something that people acquire voluntarily.

I think some of those PC terms go too far. Someone once told me that 'mixed race' is offensive and we should use the term 'dual heritage'. I found this ridiculous as we are all of dual heritage except for Jesus who was the result of a virgin birth.

Pretty funny, I read your post earlier about the threads gradually going off topic when they got hijacked after a few posts by teachers picking up on language issues and then read this one from start to finish. Spot on

Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Re: Anonymity

Who is online

Register/Login to CEO with your Social Media Account: