This reminder is prompted by comments just received from LDouble and Hudson Hypocrisy. I bent my own rules and published the comments, but in future I may not. Commenters on The Gossips of Rivertown are asked to identify themselves by their first and last names--their actual names not pseudonyms or the names of fictional characters. This post, published on April 1, 2025, explains the changes in policy and the reason why they were adopted: "A Notice to Commenters." Please refer it to for more information. Your cooperation will be appreciated.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
Humble suggestion:
ReplyDeleteMost pseudonymous commenters on Gossips are not truly anonymous, and very much known to their neighbors in town but not strangers in other stats.
They are known, at least by reputation, to regular readers. I sometimes introduce myself lightheartedly at Town Hall as FNI, much to Tom's frustration, and others do likewise.
Hudson has a long tradition of respecting how people choose to present themselves, especially in our LGBTQ community.
Pseudonyms have a legitimate place in public discourse. Shawn Carter performs as Jay Z. Serena Williams’s husband, the Reddit founder, goes by @kn0thing. Our own mayor is known as Kk. Rich Volo is also Trixie. The Federalist Papers were signed by Publius. Artists, writers, and forum users have long contributed under consistent, thoughtful aliases. The list goes on.
The problem, as you rightly flag, is not pseudonyms but abuse. Trolls who post hate, doxxing, violent threats, or political bait under disposable accounts, then delete them, break the chain of conversation and erode trust. We had that problem earlier this year that lead to this policy.
But when a contributor like Union Jack writes with consistency from the same account, originality, and respect, even without being personally known but clearly local, their “proof of work” speaks for itself.
Others have legitimate reasons for privacy too. A domestic violence victim may wish to speak freely without alerting a former stalker or unstable ex. An undocumented immigrant might want to participate in public life without harming their DACA/Greencard application, visa chances, or background screenings with ICE, not to mention more punitive foreign immigration services.
A professional working with clients in Iran or China, or someone doing advocacy work for at-risk populations, may need to avoid searchable political opinions. Privacy can coexist with accountability, imho.
It might also help new Hudson residents, those evil transplants who ALL come from Brooklyn and nowhere else, if there were a short list of common reasons why comments get rejected, simply to show the policy is applied with consistency.
Zachos, Kk, Peter Frank, and other FNI founding fan club members may be entertained to know that Gossips has on more than one occasion not published my own comments for being off-topic and, in one case, unhelpful. Upon reflection I agreed.
With that in mind, might Gossips consider evolving the current policy into a brief, public note, perhaps linked in the footer, outlining a path for verified anonymity and brief examples of helpful posts/contributors for norm setting?
That would allow thoughtful voices to participate while guarding against the worst behaviour.
Thanks, as always, for all the work you do to keep the forum civil, filter abuse, and no doubt deal with retaliation.
Just my 0.02.
Carole, I thought I had previously given you my first and last names. It's Llew Young (hence LDouble).
ReplyDelete