Don't lie on Baylyblog...
by David and Tim Bayly on May 18, 2011 - 5:56am
Under this post, a man or woman identifying himself or herself as "Ben S" commented. On a hunch, I checked him or her out and found he or she's been using a number of false identities here on Baylyblog for over five years, now...
He or she has posted under "Ben," "Ben S," "Brian," "John," "John Green," and maybe one or two other false names. His or her locations have gone from Athens, GA to Greenville, SC and Nashville, TN (although his or her latest was Columbus, IN).He or she is a devious man or woman. In one of his or her more innocuous exchanges with others under a particular post, he or she had been identifying himself or herself as "Brian," then slipped up and used the name "John" for one of his or her comments. The next comment, he or she said "Oops. Last comment was me. Not sure how 'John' got in there." But "John" got in there because frequently on this blog he or she has posted under that name. In other words, he or she forgot which lie he or she was using under which post.
If you're going to comment here on Baylyblog, don't lie.
This man or woman has commented scores of times, and I suppose it's some consolation that he or she is almost always fomenting rebellion against the Word of God. There's a certain internal logic when a man or woman claims to honor Scripture in promoting feminism and then lies about his or her name, also.
Note carefully that he or she has long been a big promoter of the pastor of Redeemer in New York City.
Clearnote Churches
Clearnote Fellowship
Christ the Word
Monthly archive
- June 2013 (15)
- May 2013 (28)
- April 2013 (33)
- March 2013 (43)
- February 2013 (28)
- January 2013 (41)
- December 2012 (31)
- November 2012 (37)
- October 2012 (38)
- September 2012 (21)
- August 2012 (28)
- July 2012 (46)
Popular Posts
Tags
Feminism (589)
Abortion euthanasia... (585)
Politics (367)
Reformed world (322)
PCA (305)
Homosexuality (296)
Evangelicalism (295)
Misc. (270)
Throw the radio in the bathtub (260)
Academia (256)
Reformed theology (238)
Culture (227)
Children are a blessing (220)
Emergent church (209)
R2K (Radical Two Kingdom) (200)
Recent Comments
- high back executive chair on Athanasius College: an alternative to old schools' hyperinflated tuition...
- can i get my ex back after a year 2 on Athanasius College: an alternative to old schools' hyperinflated tuition...
- Abram Hess on Theological critique of Escondido Two Kingdoms theology (VIII): Machen was a culture warrior...
- Bert Perry on Homeschooling, church discipline, and the education of our children...
- Carol Noren Johnson on Homeschooling, church discipline, and the education of our children...
Comments
Quite right. Am I right, though, in thinking that you will allow anonymous posting if the poster provides you with a good reason and makes it clear to readers that his pseudonym is a pseudonym? You might consider having a sidebar note with a comment policy.
Just out of curiousity, how does one track down a commenter who leaves no link to a website, and their IP is changing? Call me confused. Or Bike bubba. :^)j
(hoping you respond "vee haf vays.....")
Tim,
I don't agree that the use of pseudonyms in general is lying -- on the internet pseudonyms or handles are often used without the general expectation that it must be your real name. This is more clear to me with with obvious handles like "Bike Bubba" than it is with normal-looking names like John, though -- with the latter I would expect it's his real name.
But I think you're not taking issue with pseudonyms in general, but rather posting under multiple pseudonyms -- presenting the appearance of multiple people holding a view when it's just one person. Right?
This could be done somewhat innocently if you use multiple pseudonyms various places (though why not stop confusing people and stick with one handle). I think that lying would come in when there's an intent to mislead. In sum, are you aiming at:
1. "The dishonesty of pseudonyms in general", or
2. "The dishonesty of multiple pseudonyms in general", or
3. "The dishonesty of multiple pseudonyms used for nefarious purposes"
Thank you
O no! I'm actually Daniel Meyer. ("Meyerb" was a bloopernym, not a pseudonym)
Dear Eric,
Yes, you're right. There are times when we allow anonymity--whether because we think it best or because someone does it and we don't stop it.
What we require is truthfulness, and using an identity and e-mail address that are false is lying. Using a pseudonym is discouraged in almost all cases, but sometimes it's OK (or even good) as long as it's accompanied by a real e-mail address and it's not simply "John" or "Jane" (and it's not switched from post to post, say from John to Bill to Brian).
One exception to what we might call our policy of very limited and identifiable pseudonymity is when someone criticizes someone else in a personal way. Then we require a real first and last name.
Concerning putting this in the sidebar, good idea. Someday I'll do it.
Love,
PS: This comment was written several hours ago, but interrupted before being posted.
>>But I think you're not taking issue with pseudonyms in general, but rather posting under multiple pseudonyms -- presenting the appearance of multiple people holding a view when it's just one person. Right?
Dear Daniel,
Basically, right. But the brunt of our condemnation here falls on a man who makes scores of comments under both a variety of names and e-mail addresses, and doesn't identify himself to us when he gets personal with others who are identified and is challenged to do so (a while back), and doesn't respond to e-mails asking him to identify himself to us personally.
Love,
>>how does one track down a commenter...
It's a lot of work, but in addition to names we have IP addresses, various e-mail addresses and names shared across those IP addresses that link them together, a web site identifying one of the e-mail addresses, as well as tone, vocabulary, and thrust of comments. It's not one-hundred percent accurate, but higher than ninety-five.
Love,
I like "vee haf vays" better.
Excellent post.
I have defended anonymity on this blog in the past, and I was wrong.
This behavior is simply not excusable. Using a pseudonym is one thing - using multiple pseudonyms is quite another. I have no respect for someone who does that.
Depravity loves the shadows. Look at how pornography has exploded in the last 30-40 years, first with the VCR and then with the Internet.
If you need help tracking down Mbeki Ndoko von Sponheim by chance, I think I can help. :)
Lizzie,
Are you sure you want to?
Smiling,
Fighting Frieda
Sponheim... Sponheim... ha! Here it is: http://www.baylyblog.com/2010/03/tim-david-and-i-have-often-said-we-do-not-think-anonymity-is-good-particularly-on-the-internet-we-dont-require-registrati.html - comment #6.
Add new comment