I am not nor have I ever been on Facebook.
Some chess clubs I play against have a FB page and broadcast games on FB.
Occasionally I will get my wife to log into hers so I can look at these.
TU from me, Pondy. Furthermore, Zuck is a scoundrel who shirks responsibility and monetarizes children. I despise him and boycott his products.
RE anonymous posting; Zuck doesn’t care who posts what; he never takes responsibility for content. The only thing he cares about is the number of connections, which translates into money in his pocket. If he thinks he can attract more people by offering anonymous posting, he’ll offer anonymous posting. If he thought cats could operate the UI, he’d monetarize cats with a feline FB.
TU from me, Pondy. Furthermore, Zuck is a scoundrel who shirks responsibility and monetarizes children. I despise him and boycott his products.
RE anonymous posting; Zuck doesn’t care who posts what; he never takes responsibility for content. The only thing he cares about is the number of connections, which translates into money in his pocket. If he thinks h ...[text shortened]... r anonymous posting. If he thought cats could operate the UI, he’d monetarize cats with a feline FB.
Irrespective of your vehement dislike and disapproval of Zuckerberg, what are you thoughts on anonymous posting generally, and specifically in the light of the recent discussions of anonymous thumbs which you are an ardent supporter of?
@divegeestersaid Irrespective of your vehement dislike and disapproval of Zuckerberg, what are you thoughts on anonymous posting generally, and specifically in the light of the recent discussions of anonymous thumbs which you are an ardent supporter of?
Anonymous thumbs lack content, but refer to a non-anonymous post which has content. Anonymous posts have content. That’s a significant difference. If someone anonymously posts incitement to violence, for example, the post should not only be deleted, but the poster banned. This will be possible only if, behind the UI, site admin can still identify the user.
@moonbussaid Anonymous thumbs lack content, but refer to a non-anonymous post which has content. Anonymous posts have content. That’s a significant difference. If someone anonymously posts incitement to violence, for example, the post should not only be deleted, but the poster banned. This will be possible only if, behind the UI, site admin can still identify the user.
But anonymity here is only “anonymous” to the public interface… posters could still alert the posts and the site administration would be able to see who the poster was and still ban them, so your point is moot.
Anonymity is only for the public face of the forum, surely with your allegiance to anonymous thumbs, you would support anonymous posting?
@divegeestersaid But anonymity here is only “anonymous” to the public interface… posters could still alert the posts and the site administration would be able to see who the poster was and still ban them, so your point is moot.
Anonymity is only for the public face of the forum, surely with your allegiance to anonymous thumbs, you would support anonymous posting?
I support taking responsibility for content. And don't call me Shirley.