Quote from: heywoody on December 23, 2012, 07:31

you can have well argued posts delivered anonymously but even these would be strengthened if the author is prepared to stand over

Only if the point requires a signature. Opinion does not necessarily have more gravitas for being signed. References (eg to sources) and examples are what matters (as I am sure many of us learned at University).

So, I suppose you submitted your course work anonymously??  Anonymous opinion can be well argued, honest and pertinent but does not have the same �gravitas�.  There is a reason people have to give evidence in court and not just send in an anonymous note.

Quote from: heywoody on December 23, 2012, 07:31

I would suggest though that "good" or "bad" depends on whether the reader agrees or not.

Only where the answer involves a subjective opinion. Not in a world of right and wrong answers.

Very little in this world is black or white � most discourse involves subjective opinion

Quote from: heywoody on December 23, 2012, 07:31

On this particular site, the one area of opinion for which I'd have zero respect is port criticism by those in the long grass.

If someone asks for a critique it makes no difference whether the responses they get are anonymous or not. All that matters is the quality of the opinion. For the most part a well delivered critique will validate itself. The quality of a critique stands or falls on the quality of the opinion. Nothing else. Remember that the buyers are anonymous.

How can a newbie tell if an opinion is harsh but fair or something delivered by someone who gets his jollies from belittling others?  If you want critique post on the SS or IS forum.

Quote from: heywoody on December 23, 2012, 07:31

I challenge anyone to provide a reason for anonymity that isn�t rooted in fear or dishonesty.

I would turn that the other way. Unless an opinion requires a signature I do not see any reason why it should need to be signed.

In many cases you are likely to get more honest answers from anonymous sources.

Nobody is saying something needs to be signed, that is entirely up to the poster but the reader, equally, can draw conclusions.  Being totally unaccountable for comment can certainly be an aid to honesty.

Quote from: cclapper on December 23, 2012, 10:32

I think that's what attracts a lot of people to the internet, they can be anonymous and say or do whatever they want to others without having to take responsibility for their actions or words.

IMO these sorts of anti - anonymity themes are often propagated by interests which seek or advocate greater control of the internet and greater control of opinion in general. Often in concert with lobbying on behalf of companies which want greater freedom to harvest and exploit personal information. Anti - bullying arguments are often used in this context.

In reality, much of the most acerbic, ignorant and bitter opinion I regularly see is written or read (broadcast media) by people who are more than happy to put their names to it. This does not bother me however since I was bought up to understand that:

"sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me"

^ we need to get back to that. Rather than trying to stifle opinion.

What anti � anonymity theme?  Started by an anonymous member with fairly balanced for and against.  The argument that anonymity = freedom strikes me in the same way that the gun control = oppression argument does.
   
I have to say I really enjoyed the plagiarism argument.  I�m wondering if someone could express the % probability of the increased risk of plagiarism by posting here as against having their actual work available on numerous sites with 100s of 1000s of users?

There's no right or wrong answer to an opinion question.

There is according to some people!!

Your pole doesn't really cover my reason.
I'm anonymous (to a certain extent as most people know who I am) here only because I know that sometimes buyers will search for my portfolio using the username that I use on nearly all the Microstock sites I submit to, same for others I have no doubt, a couple of years ago I discovered that because I also used my username here most of the search results on Google were posts I'd made here, if someone is searching for my username I want them to find my images not my idle ramblings on MSG. Hence I changed to just RT.

What happened to grafix04? Left us?

That was Bobby Deal - photoshow - that Fotolia kicked out.

And Fotolia deleted my account (which I had left open but with no images after I became an iStock exclusive) and then refused to have me back as a contributor when I returned to being an independent. This was all over their displeasure over comments in public forums about their policies.

I like knowing who I am talking to. I would prefer it if people weren't anonymous, but I understand why some need or prefer to be so. I don't say anything in a public forum or on facebook that I have a problem being found in a search. I do think knowing something about where I'm coming from - portfolio of 50, 2,000 or 50K; doing stock for 6 months or 6 years; are my images boudoir shots, travel, food, 3D renderings, etc. - provides context for my opinions. I'm not sure how you could assess them - and validity isn't relevant for the most part in discussions like these - without knowing something about me. If I comment on what iStock likes or doesn't but I'm not a contributor there, you'd treat that differently from the case where I'd been there for many years, or where I was exclusive and an inspector there.

That was Bobby Deal - photoshow - that Fotolia kicked out.

Thanks that's him, I had a complete blank.

I didn't know about your situation though.

How can a newbie tell if an opinion is harsh but fair or something delivered by someone who gets his jollies from belittling others?

By intelligently understanding and evaluating the merits of the points made.

@cathy, yes, those looking to diversify will find where I am eventually but that doesn't mean I should advertise it, inviting everyone in there at once.  It gives me a chance to get my foot in the door.

But that's just one reason.

I don't see how being anonymous (on its own) matters.  As long as they're respectful of others, what difference does it make?

I understand trolls are a PITA and they annoy me just as much as anyone else.  I can't remember the ID but that guy (ltn or something like that) in the Pinerest thread who came in here just to cause trouble - people like that are annoying.  But then you get some like that who aren't anonymous. 

IMO, if someone puts their point across without putting others down, I don't care if I know their name or portfolio.  I won't change my opinion of their opinion.

Come to think of it, sometimes I prefer anonymity because there are many who are influenced by the person and not the opinion.  How many of you have one or two of those friends that agree with you just for the sake of it.  After a while it gets on your nerves and you end up respecting the guy who thinks for himself.

+1

Because I don't want my portfolio to be scrutinized 11 (23.4%)
Because I might get 'punished' by the agencies I am negative about 8 (17%)
Because I always post anonymous anywhere on the internet 3 (6.4%)
Because I am a troll 1 (2.1%) (I added this answer mainly for laughs, didnt expect to get a result here  )
Because I think the discussions get too 'personal' here 2 (4.3%)
I am not anonymous because I dont worry about any of the above 3 (6.4%)
I am not anonymous because I have nothing to hide 6 (12.8%)
I am not anonymous because I like to be open and up front with people 10 (21.3%)
I am not anonymous because it never crossed my mind to be anonymous 3 (6.4%)

Because although I stand beside everything I say, and hope I apologise for any inadvertant mistakes, I don't necessarily want anyone outside stock who looks up my real name to find all my varied rabbitings.
Actually, I was semi-anonymous, i.e. I posted under a pseudonym, but you could find my name and port, should you have wanted to, in my profile; but the site update changed that.
... which doesn't seem to fit any of the poll options.

I am not anonymous on this newsgroup for the same reason I don't wear a mask when I go out and interact with real people - what's the difference really?
So you know I am a photographer and you can see my portfolio and maybe if you're not too ethical you will copy some ideas, but that can't be stopped by me being anonymous. So what is there to hide?
When I express my opinions I like people to know who they are coming from. If an agency is petty enough to punish contributors for their opinions, then good riddance.

I don't mind if you have a look at my stuff... so you know I'm not shooting total cr8p. as a newbie I guess I just let it all hang out, maybe later I'll play closer to my chest, but for now I'm still pretty enthusiastic.

i'm not sure the copycat reason is overly valid (paranoid much?). There are 200000 photographers out there, any of whom who could view your work any time they chose to. I'd think once we "know" each other you'd be less likely to have copycats from within this community?  That could be naive, but even if someone were to copy you, they may have done so either way. Chill, I say.

Quote from: heywoody on December 23, 2012, 05:46

Actually there are only 2 reasons to be anonymous - fear or dishonesty.

Give me a break.

There's a long tradition of anonymity on the internet, going all the way back to Usenet.  Plastering the details of one's personal life all over the web is a recent thing. 

It's not clear to me why anyone should be asked to explain or justify their desire for privacy and anonymity. I'd say the questions should be going in the other direction: why is someone, in this context, expecting or demanding to know who I am?

Nobody is expecting / demanding to know who anyone is or questioning anyone's right to be anonymous, nor is anyone saying fear is necessarily bad.  However you dress is up, I have seen nothing here that doesn't, when brought down to essentials, fall into one of the 2 categories.