Disguise is fine ... |
... if you can still be identified |
Thanks for your cooperation -- and for your comments!
Disguise is fine ... |
... if you can still be identified |
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html
Très chère Merpel,
ReplyDeleteHave you considered enabling threaded comments?
The indenting goes a long way in clarifying who is responding to whom, unlike the flat style comments.
The enhanced reading experience wouldn't be incompatible with your demand of using a (preferably consistent) handle. It's still easier to have an exchange with the likes of "Bunnyhop" than "Anonymous @14:42".
I follow some blogs in subjects quite remote from IP, but ceased sharing my inane views when they went over to registration and moderation systems such as Disqus, which make a switch of ID difficult.
Dear Jeremy:
ReplyDeleteI've often wondered whether a pseudonymous person could claim for passing off or defamation. Damage might be an wee bit of an issue.
Do doubt, your team of furensically gifted kittens could solve any disputes as to who has prior use of any purrticular pseudonym.
Or perhaps Interpol and the NSA could be brought in if matters get sufficiently serious.
Indeed in light of the Ashley Madison hack, some of us may wish to paws as our tails twitch in terror, fearful that this very popular site could be next. After all, there have been some quite furvent and furocious comments here and on the 1709 Copyright Blog at times that have not doubt set tails atwitching and purhaps given rise to some furry.
BTW, Jeremy, with your bevy of blogs, have you ever thought about an IP dating site?
I hope that your find these comments to be purrfectly purrtinent and not too spurrious.
Best regards,
Uncle Wiggily
Fascinating, I post a comment that does not appear, and two comments that did appear have disappeared. If the posts were stolen is this a feliny?
ReplyDeleteI shall watch developments with interest.
I noted that two comments from US Anon disappeared, and mine in reply. Why? I think Jeremy is actively monitoring this thread, and wants no complaints from anybody, so tries hard to be neutral and even-handed in his striking-out actions. This one can understand, I think.
ReplyDeleteNow what naughty words were you typing, Meldrew, I wonder, to prompt Jeremy to strike you out too.
I'll repeat the sentiment of my earlier posting. I think it a good idea of Jeremy's, to ask posters to choose a pseudonym and, having chosen it, hold to it. Posters, nothing could be simpler, and you don't have to register your pseudonym.
Judging by what happens over on Patently-O, sooner or later there will be impersonations. Never mind, this blog is strong enough to cope with that.
Meldrew,
ReplyDeleteI guess someone's having kittens!