Not always, but sometimes.
Sure, there are reasons for being anonymous.
I've engaged in a conversation about this here.
This may very well be another example of a person screaming into the wind, but I wanted to invite the coward to respond here. Except that RedState tells me: "Error: You have not been registered long enough to comment."
However, here's what I wanted to say, and, perhaps, RedState will eventually grace me with the privilege of expressing myself in their restricted venue:
- Hey hogan, you're an ignoramus and a coward!*
- I've made some comments about your post on this site. If you have any interest in responding, feel free to respond on my blog (I can't extend the invitation for you to post on the first blog as it is not mine).
Whatever. At least we're not dead yet!
----
* Clarification May 28, 2010: In reflecting on the way I phrased this post, and this sentence in particular, I recognize that this likely comes across as ad hominem. However, before you come to this conclusion, please do read the EotAW comment thread I link to above, because I do try to support my case with evidence. My general point with all of this is that ignorance and cowardice need to be addressed directly, and not perpetuated (as Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, and Rush Limbaugh would prefer us to do). If you read the thread and still come to the conclusion that my language is unjustified, please do make your case.
-
Michelle Diane Rose addresses this same issue in "Vile effluent flows from South Waterfront's affluent" (Oregonian, June 13, 2010, p. E2):
ReplyDelete"This is the Net. You can say any vicious, cruel thing you wish and no one will know who you are because you can hide behind a screen name and feel safe. . . . Please note that my screen name is my real, legal name and I hide behind nothing. Please note that I have the courage to call you out on your bigotry and your racism and your discrimination and your cruelty."