Add new comment

The editorial by Chisel made think a few things about being an anon, and since they asked to be engaged, i’ll be happy to do so, since i mainly comment for the interaction.

So it turns out a few of my comments were mentioned in the “what’s new” new round up. I wonder if they would have not all been mentioned if it was clear they all came from the same anon.

Obviously, if everyone is an anon, it’s hard to tell who’s who, and that’s kinda the point. What is said stands or falls by itself, apart from who said it, for better and worse.

Names accumulate reputations, good or bad. Then what is said, attached to the name, is judged in light of the previous things that name has said, for better and worse.

Is talking to anon like talking to a stranger? What happens after a stranger introduces themselves and presents their name? Is the mystique or sense of possibility lost once one really gets to know someone?

Also anon let’s you troll like a dumbass one second, and then not have it affect on other’s perception of some serious thing you might say later. It also keeps people from knowing you, to a degree, which guards against cutting personal attacks. They can’t hurt your feelings if it’s anon that takes the fall!

I don’t know, just thinking. I think i’m probably not going to start a named account, nor a podcast, even though i agree with what Chisel said.