| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"towelie" |
| Date: |
28 Jan 2005 11:53:52 PM |
| Object: |
OT: USENET etiquette |
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
--
Shake says that books are from the devil, and that TV is twice as fast -
Meatwad
Get off your fuckin' cross. We need the fuckin' space to nail the next fool
martyr - Tool, "Eulogy"
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
| User: "XpatriotgamesX" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 06:34:54 PM |
|
|
Subject: OT: USENET etiquette
From: "towelie"
Date: 1/28/2005 3:53 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <3601ksF4sj7qiU1@individual.net>
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
Recently in NJ there was a family of four Coptic Christians who had their
throats slit in their home presumably by angered Muslims who disliked the
father's expressed contempt for Islam in an on-line chat room. 'Nuff said.
.
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 10:30:09 PM |
|
|
TV's XpatriotgamesX wrote:
Subject: OT: USENET etiquette
From: "towelie"
Date: 1/28/2005 3:53 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <3601ksF4sj7qiU1@individual.net>
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de
plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody
else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as
this
one.
Recently in NJ there was a family of four Coptic Christians who had their
throats slit in their home presumably by angered Muslims who disliked the
father's expressed contempt for Islam in an on-line chat room. 'Nuff said.
Exactly. And with the kooks that run around here, it's better to be safe
than dead.
--
Shake says that books are from the devil, and that TV is twice as fast -
Meatwad
Get off your fuckin' cross. We need the fuckin' space to nail the next fool
martyr - Tool, "Eulogy"
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "chibiabos" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 12:53:15 AM |
|
|
In article <3601ksF4sj7qiU1@individual.net>, towelie
<bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
No *****.
From time to time I consider "coming out" using my real name. Things
would be a lot easier. Then I look around and see some of the kooks and
crazies out there, and the direction this country is going wrt
religious loyalties & such, and I say, Naaaahh. Not yet.
-chib
--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Emma Pease" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 01:40:31 AM |
|
|
In article <3601ksF4sj7qiU1@individual.net>, towelie wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such
as this one.
The rule varies from group to group. In general a well established
nom-de-plume is allowed anywhere (i.e., if you choose one, stick with
it and don't change every two weeks). I know one group (a sf fan
group) where choosing a nom de plume from the author's books is
frowned upon (mostly because they were fed up with 25 people calling
themselves some variant of 'dragon') but well established non-canon
nom de plumes were allowed (e.g., skwid and hawk). There may be some
newsgroups where only real names are allowed but I can't think of one
off-hand [after all how can you tell if a name used is really the
poster's?].
Emma
--
\----
|\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster
|_\/ Die Luft der Freiheit weht
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 12:58:39 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:52 -0600, "towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com>
thought hard and said:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
Oops.
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 16 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, Krzysztof Penderecki, and Geirr Tveitt are my Gods.
Head of EAC Denial Department and Madly Insane Scientist.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 03:34:29 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:52 -0600, "towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com>
wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
I use my real name. I don't see any danger in it. I don't, however,
use my real e-mail address. I've just never developed a taste for
spam. <G>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 06:35:40 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:52 -0600, "towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com>
wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
No.
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
A number of a.a. regulars have not only my real name and e-mail but my
home address as well.
And many of them I would welcome into my home and give them the code
to my alarm system as well as the keys to my house and car while they
were here.
If any regular, with very few exceptions, <Two or maybe three actually
who are about as rabidly nuts as any fundy religionist imo> asks for
my e-mail, home address or phone number I will gladly give it.
But I don't use my real name here because I don't want to take the
chance that that perverse old bitty Ms. Dinkins <My fifth grade
teacher> would accidently stumble across the fact that I'm still alive
and come screeching up to my front door on her gawdamn broom demanding
that last bit of homework I didn't turn in.
<shudders>
Or that Mr. Simmons would see my name, trace me down and show up at my
house with that damnable piece of varnished hardwood he called the
"board of education" and demand that I take that last set of licks he
owes me.
<Hell, I can't even bend over and grab my ankles anymore so I ain't
hardly fit for a decent and proper licking>
And how about my first wife?
Would you want her to know that *you're* not half dead in some damned
nursing home somewhere, but alive and well and posting to usenet?
I mean if you were me and all?
I think not.
I loved the movie Seabiscuit btw though it's a bit off subject.
It brought back warm memories of the last time I saw my first wife.
You know the part where Seabiscuit first kicks into high gear and all
you can see is that horse's ***** disappearing in the distance?
<sigh>
Made me feel all warm and fuzzy.
Anyway as Tommy "Da' Fink" Anastasso says.."They's just some folks
what it's better they don't know where yer at.
atheist@home#1554
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DJ Nozem" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 02:33:05 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:52 -0600, "towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com>
wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
No. But it's stupid to call someone a coward when yr using a nym.
(because the card gets called easily)
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
Depends on where you're at in RL.
--
We give meaning to each other
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Forbes" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 03:20:53 AM |
|
|
DJ Nozem wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:52 -0600, "towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com>
wrote:
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
Depends on where you're at in RL.
I think it depends more on how much of an a-hole you are on usenet....
--
Jim
Visit the Selectric Typewriter Museum!
http://www.selectric.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Doc Smartass" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 04:52:46 AM |
|
|
J Forbes <jforbspam@fastmail.fm> wrote in
news:piDKd.567$Nn1.87@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
DJ Nozem wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:52 -0600, "towelie"
<bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such
as this one.
Depends on where you're at in RL.
I think it depends more on how much of an a-hole you are on usenet....
I'll never be able to change my name, then =D
--
Dr. Smartass, an asshollllio-lio...
Hurl, hurl, door gong's oil hair!
Wart inhale dough way cur?
Wart inhale dough way cur?
Hurl, hurl, door gong's oil hair!
Wart inhale dough way cur, nor?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
01 Feb 2005 07:16:03 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:53:52 -0600, "towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com>
wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
The OP is extremely confused.
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "J Forbes" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 12:58:11 AM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
I don't know what's unsafe about using your real name...I don't have
any problems. I also use a real email address, and it only gets
spammed a little bit (but it has the word spam in it, so maybe the
robots remove the word spam and it doesn't go thru?)
--
Jim
Visit the Selectric Typewriter Museum!
http://www.selectric.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn Arnold" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 03:39:46 AM |
|
|
J Forbes wrote:
towelie wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de
plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody
else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such
as this
one.
I don't know what's unsafe about using your real name...I don't have any
problems. I also use a real email address, and it only gets spammed a
little bit (but it has the word spam in it, so maybe the robots remove
the word spam and it doesn't go thru?)
Now that's devious!
Glenn Arnold
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 12:37:22 AM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
Well, I've always used my real name. And e-mail address as well.
Of course, running my own mail server, set to block everything by
default, is a big help.
It also helps that I run my own news server as well. Of course, the
occasional feed failure from upstream does cause a few issues.
And the only snail mail spam I get through the internet, is what I've
asked for.
So, I don't think whom ever said this was really talking about net
etiquette, but was chiding everyone for not giving them easy access to
your information.
And another name and address to sell to a spam house.
--
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor
A.A #1143 PLONKED by Bob
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 02:46:05 AM |
|
|
TV's Rev. Karl E. Taylor wrote:
towelie wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de
plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody
else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as
this
one.
Well, I've always used my real name. And e-mail address as well.
Of course, running my own mail server, set to block everything by
default, is a big help.
It also helps that I run my own news server as well. Of course, the
occasional feed failure from upstream does cause a few issues.
And the only snail mail spam I get through the internet, is what I've
asked for.
So, I don't think whom ever said this was really talking about net
etiquette, but was chiding everyone for not giving them easy access to
your information.
This guy is a long-time poster to the NG, so I don't think that's what it
was in this instance. This is the same guy who claims that 51% is a
"mandate" so it's not surprising that he's wrong.
--
Shake says that books are from the devil, and that TV is twice as fast -
Meatwad
Get off your fuckin' cross. We need the fuckin' space to nail the next fool
martyr - Tool, "Eulogy"
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 05:50:35 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:46:05 -0600, "towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
This guy is a long-time poster to the NG, so I don't think that's what it
was in this instance. This is the same guy who claims that 51% is a
"mandate" so it's not surprising that he's wrong.
*FRED*? The default position, wrt anything, is that Fred is wrong.
Oh, and no, it's not improper to use a nym.
--
"Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom. Atheism is human
concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind cannot
begin to understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an old
religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and never has
been, a religion at all. The definition of Atheism is magnificent in its
simplicity: Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
[Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields]
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 07:52:55 AM |
|
|
TV's Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:46:05 -0600, "towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
This guy is a long-time poster to the NG, so I don't think that's what it
was in this instance. This is the same guy who claims that 51% is a
"mandate" so it's not surprising that he's wrong.
*FRED*? The default position, wrt anything, is that Fred is wrong.
Nah, this guy does not post to a.a. I think he's a Fundamentalist
Christian, however.
--
Shake says that books are from the devil, and that TV is twice as fast -
Meatwad
Get off your fuckin' cross. We need the fuckin' space to nail the next fool
martyr - Tool, "Eulogy"
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
29 Jan 2005 06:10:42 AM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
TV's Rev. Karl E. Taylor wrote:
towelie wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de
plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody
else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as
this
one.
Well, I've always used my real name. And e-mail address as well.
Of course, running my own mail server, set to block everything by
default, is a big help.
It also helps that I run my own news server as well. Of course, the
occasional feed failure from upstream does cause a few issues.
And the only snail mail spam I get through the internet, is what I've
asked for.
So, I don't think whom ever said this was really talking about net
etiquette, but was chiding everyone for not giving them easy access to
your information.
This guy is a long-time poster to the NG, so I don't think that's what it
was in this instance. This is the same guy who claims that 51% is a
"mandate" so it's not surprising that he's wrong.
Ahhh, I get it now.
Someone that makes up the rules as they go along.
--
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor
A.A #1143 PLONKED by Bob
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: USENET etiquette |
28 Jan 2005 11:59:14 PM |
|
|
towelie wrote:
A poster on another NG claims that it's bad etiquette to use a nom de plume
instead of one's real name. I've never heard this claim, has anybody else?
IMO it's safer to not use your real name, especially in a group such as this
one.
in alt.geek they occasionally all use the name 'john malkovich', very
confusing
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
