Clayton: Blogging Can Be Hazardous

52 comments on this post so far. Add yours!

• 

  Arch_Druid on January 14 at 1:57 p.m.

  I may disagree with Clayton Cramer but uphold to the utmost his right to blog what ever he chooses. Threatening him with a job loss for posting what he does, is beyond the obnoxious. A free country is free for Cramer too.

• 

  Me on January 14 at 2:25 p.m.

  no comment.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 14 at 3:00 p.m.

  Its one reason why I’m pseudonymous.

• 

  JeanieSpokane on January 14 at 3:22 p.m.

  I have had a blogger threaten me for posting during work hours.

  Hey, buddy! I can blog all I want to now as I am my own boss and I don’t care how often my employee (me) surfs the internet and posts nonsense on my nutty blog. I’m going to even give myself a raise. Get a life!

• 

  Bubblehead on January 14 at 3:38 p.m.

  Threatening to cause problems for a blogger in their real life (for something other than threatening violence, especially against elected officials like the President) is, to me, beyond the pale. People who do such things should be excluded from polite society.

• 

  MikeK on January 14 at 4:04 p.m.

  Does being unelected count? ;-)

• 

  Cindy_H on January 14 at 5:25 p.m.

  pseudonymous

  That’s really hard to say.

• 

  Phaedrus on January 14 at 5:45 p.m.

  Its the only reason why I’m pseudonymous. Those conservative protectors of liberties and civil rights don’t hesitate to attack a persons family or livelihood if you frustrate them enough with logic and refuse to bow to their desire to have everyone think and believe as they do.

• 

  dmcourtn on January 14 at 5:49 p.m.

  Moscow’s liberals did this recently to Henry D. Johnston, a conservative editorial writer in the Moscow-Pullman Daily News. His personal opinions in the editorial elicited a customer service complaint to the national home office of his business. He decided to not write editorials any longer for fear of losing his job.

  http://right-mind.us/blogs/blog_0/archive/2009/12/08/71075.aspx

  The only reason I can blog with my own name is that I’m retired from the military. Otherwise, Moscow’s liberals would do the same to me.

  Best,
  Dale
  People’s Republic of Moscow

• 

  nic on January 14 at 5:59 p.m.

  “Threatening to cause problems for a blogger in their real life (for something other than threatening violence, especially against elected officials like the President) is, to me, beyond the pale. People who do such things should be excluded from polite society.”

  You mean… like how DanG threatened Reagan over at openCDA?

• 

  Phaedrus on January 14 at 6:45 p.m.

  Sorry Dale but that is not the same thing. Henry wrote a newspaper column, not a blog. And he wrote about his business. In other words, he set himself up, not a smart decision on his part.

• 

  fortboise on January 14 at 7:51 p.m.

  No.

• 

  spokelooneh on January 15 at 2:43 a.m.

  That’s mighty damn funny, Dale. Poor Digger was destined for a major meltdown, what with him supporting a party that would just as soon have him and his partner considered persona-non-grata. At best. He and his beau are lucky not to have been lynched by his political party mates.

  Don’t get around much on Huckleberries much, do ya Dale?

• 

  spokelooneh on January 15 at 2:52 a.m.

  Oh yeah Dale? If Hank was in fear of losing his job, it’s his own damn fault for his asinine business management techniques that he described on this blog many a time. We tried to school the hapless Hank, and he’d have none of it, because Hank was nearly always right, in his own mind.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 8:22 a.m.

  This one always seems to make me wonder. Is what is said under a pseudonym how someone truly feels or is it something you wish you could say under your real name? If that is the case then what kind of person or people are we? If our job is at risk as a result then why are we doing that job if it is so against our noble stances and words that we choose while hiding?
  The fact that we snipe from the comfort of hiding is, to me, an even worse reflection of a major character flaw. Cowardice in that it is so defended by so many points to the fact that deep inside those who do it know it to be true. If one’s job or life is set up in such a way that they have to hide to express their “real” thoughts and feelings then what we have here are people putting on a false persona and, I’m not sure if that is what I would classify as integrity.
  This format gives the freedom to express ourselves indeed. It affords us a place to test our ideas and opinions on various subjects without ramifications, personal ramifications that is, but to hell to those who might be harmed or damaged by what we say from hiding. But, when discussing a potentially touchy subject like religion or politics live and in person being accountable for ourselves as we live and breath before one another we are careful, more diplomatic, and even more compassionate to our fellow man and yes, even more hostile. In cases that are so dear to us and our perspective on life, the good and bad that we view life from, as we walk around and that define us as who we are and then how we express and stand by in real life, well, that’s integrity. And I’m of the opinion that if you can’t express yourself as you, as whom you really are then you, and I, lack a certain degree of this trait. The loudest mouths in here who defend anonymity and who will pontificate the virtues of hiding and then hollering opinions and thoughts that are contradictory to the façade that is their real life lack it the most. Of this there can be no doubt.

• 

  Phaedrus on January 15 at 8:32 a.m.

  ejs, your thought might be true, but they might not. Your assumption that anonymity is a synonym for cowardice is, I believe, false. Here is another position:

  “This country has a long, and revered history of anonymous political commentary, beginning with Thomas Paine, the author of the widely read pamphlet, Common Sense (1776), which advocated for America’s independence from Great Britain, and The American Crisis (1776–1783), a pro-revolutionary pamphlet series.”

  http://indiedesign.typepad.com/inspire_political_discour/2009/04/anonymity-free-speech-and-why-alaska-democrat-mike-doogan-is-an-asshat.html

• 

  nic on January 15 at 8:53 a.m.

  ejs, noble thoughts but that line of thinking fails in reality.

  I’ll use Thom George as an example (I hope he doesn’t mind). Back in the day (when he was harping about Cheney’s visit to Cd’A) an anonymous poster cam on here and posted Thom’s employment info - the place he worked, his office phone number - and was using it as a threat that Thom’s liberal views were going to cost him business.

  His job wasn’t against his noble stances, his political beliefs were not a risk to his job. The risk to his job was some nameless craven keyboard commando with an axe to grind.

  We haven’t seen Thom post here in about a year… if he’s here under a pseudonym I don’t blame him. Thom is the kind of man who is going to express his thoughts no matter what. Thom is Thom under his own name as much as he is under an assumed name. If he is here under an alias , it’s not out of a need to express thoughts he couldn’t under his own name. It’s protection from the vindictive gas bags that have pursued him in the past.

  I can’t fault him for that.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 8:55 a.m.

  Phaed that’s a good example of the harm anomymity does. The anonymous writer takes no rist in advocating others to take risk. Paine’s pamphlet does just that. The logic is sound but for everyone else to test ry. Now should it work, then behold, from the shadows come the hidden and in this case, to the grave go the real patriots.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 9:02 a.m.

  Nic, I understand the logic, if logic is the right term, I truly do but again if a persons opinion, their who they are opinion, causes distress then they should be more wise in how they express it. Otherwise, we don’t know what or who is the true person, the true soul.

• 

  nic on January 15 at 9:02 a.m.

  Speaking of gas bags…

  I find it ironic when people with pseudonyms attack or insult people for using a nom de plume. Why aren’t you using your real name, ejs?

  “The fact that we snipe from the comfort of hiding is, to me, an even worse reflection of a major character flaw.” So what’s your major character flaw?

  “If one’s job or life is set up in such a way that they have to hide to express their “real” thoughts and feelings then what we have here are people putting on a false persona and, I’m not sure if that is what I would classify as integrity.” Right. And how do you classify yourself?

  “but to hell to those who might be harmed or damaged by what we say from hiding.” Who are you out to damage from hiding?

  p.s. – I use my real name… and I defend the rights of those who chose anonymity. I defy the hypocrisy of someone who claims moral superiority over the anonymous while they themselves hide behind a false name.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 9:08 a.m.

  Nic, “nameless craven keyboard commando” again nameless actions that hurt someone. Would that nameless nutbag have done or said what they did if it was really them, accoutable for their words? I think not. Maybe yes but they would then have to face the result, personally for all to see.

• 

  nic on January 15 at 9:16 a.m.

  ejs, if you think that anonymous commentors have a major character flaw and lack integrity, why don’t you use your real name?

• 

  nic on January 15 at 9:17 a.m.

  (not saying that you should use your real name, and not asking you to out yourself, just trying to understand the logic, if logic is the right term)

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 9:18 a.m.

  Nic while you cut and paste you left out the
  “And I’m of the opinion that if you can’t express yourself as you, as whom you really are then you, and I, lack a certain degree of this trait.”
  I admit, above, my posting under just my initials is a lack of integrity. Seeems you missed that
  Take it easy my friend, Nic, who uses his real name. Only about a million “Nic’s” out there but hey it’s real.
  I pointed out the hypocrisy so thanks and included myself.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 15 at 9:32 a.m.

  Oy. Again I gotta make the point. Pseudonymous is not the same as anonymous. Your points, ejs, are kinda insignificant in that context. Your making an automatic assumption that all people who use pseudonyms are trolls. That doesn’t follow. In fact many of our founding fathers used pseudonyms in the press, not only to make points against the British, against whom the fear of retribution was assured, but against their political opponents after independence.

  Sisyphus has a presence and a personality in the tubes, and he likes to think he has integrity. He can be contacted through his blog and he can be held accountable for his past words and conduct in this world. And his presence is probably more meaningful than others choosing to use their meat puppet names which generally mean nothing to me. I also find it kinda funny that there’s much more on Sisyphus’ site profile on this blog than there is for ejs.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 15 at 9:34 a.m.

  And Nic, for those that know EJS, who he is is obvious. He has used his real name here before. To me, his online presence is just as real as your nickname.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 15 at 9:41 a.m.

  Hey CB, did you know Father Riffle? I saw his obit today. He was quite the character.

• 

  Phaedrus on January 15 at 9:44 a.m.

  “..for those that know EJS, who he is is obvious”

  And for those who do not, it is meaningless. What’s your point? Assuming you have one.

  ejs, nic is correct, love the hypocrisy. ;-)

• 

  nic on January 15 at 9:44 a.m.

  “Only about a million “Nic’s” out there but hey it’s real.”

  But only one “nic with my ugly mug… that avatar is a real picture of the real me. And if that’s not enough, ejs, maybe you should take a little extra effort and check out the SR profiles. If you look at mine, it includes a link to my facebook page where you can find my last name, and a link to my blog where the url contains my full name. When Dave front pages me, he usually uses my last name and there’s only one of me in the inland northwest. granted there’s one of me in Australia, and one in West Virginia (but he spells his name with a “k”) but there is only one of me here.

  Sorry for getting so worked up ejs (I’m glad CB knows who you are - I don’t) but you have no room to criticize other for not using their name when you don’t use yours.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 9:50 a.m.

  OK, again the loudest mouths will defend it the most. Equating the Revolution folks as a defense for the stuff that goes on here is a bit out there but again I understand the connection. And again this is what we have here this is what is set up but just because that’s the way it is doesn’t make it right.
  Sis indeed you have a presence and personality, would it be the same if you used your real name, you could say yes, but we’ll never know. Your blog? Ha like I would want to search that to hunt you down? Unless you use your real full name on there it’s another dead point.

• 

  MikeK on January 15 at 9:52 a.m.

  Sis my wife’s family was very close to Fr. Riffle. This is the first I’ve heard that he died. That’s very sad - my wife’s grandmother went to his masses for years and years, following him whereever he was sitting in for another priest, even in his retirement. Thanks for the heads up.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 9:55 a.m.

  Nic, again I critisize myself, you seem to keep missing that point. I’m not holding myself above anyone who uses a tricky name just pointing out how it works and how many use it. And why would I want to check out profiles I don’t care what possitoin people take it’s all enjoyable to me and you tend to play fare as does Sis and that’s fine but many do not and given the chance many under a false name, depending on the tone of the dialog, will act foolishly simply because they can.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 15 at 9:57 a.m.

  Sis, no I did not know him.

  Phaed, my point, he has used his real name on here before. He is hardly hiding behind a fake greek name. He has even signed his comments at time under the new moniker.

• 

  MikeK on January 15 at 9:58 a.m.

  Sis now I’m confused - I just read the obituary online and I didn’t know there were two Fr. Riffles - siblings who were both priests. I’ll have to ask my wife to sort out who’s who, because I thought the priest they were close to was Fr. Don Riffle, and it appears Fr. Douglas was the one who passed away.

• 

  nic on January 15 at 10:07 a.m.

  “And why would I want to check out profiles I don’t care what possitoin people ”

  You can’t pretend I’m anonymous when a little effort would prove otherwise.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 15 at 10:08 a.m.

  Thanks Mike. I didn’t know that either. Sorry for causing any confusion.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 10:14 a.m.

  Ok OK Nic, your not anonymuus, we get it. Albeit you have to be sooooo interested in you that you have to seach out the real Nic. Why not just use your real name then if your so open?
  It’s all cool man, I don’t really care. Just pointing out that people would be different and dialog would be different if EVERYONE used their real names. Can we agree on that at least.
  Granted the hits would drop by more than half and Dave would certainly not like that.
  Makes me wonder what name DAve hides under. He has to have one don’t you guys think?

• 

  MikeK on January 15 at 10:14 a.m.

  No, Sis you didn’t cause any confusion - it’s news I would have absolutely wanted to know and hadn’t gotten anywhere else, so seriously thanks for the alert. I had no idea there was more than one Fr. Riffle is all.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 15 at 10:21 a.m.

  “Your blog? Ha like I would want to search that to hunt you down? Unless you use your real full name on there it’s another dead point.”—Yes, embrace ignorance as your salvation. Your point was that we’re not accountable. That’s certainly false in my case.

  Of course there’s freedom in using a different name. But you seem to be making the point that its a bad thing, that we lack integrity. No more than Ben Franklin. Some of us would rather the focus be on the content of our speech which absolutely could be altered to protect ourselves against the very thing which is the topic of this post.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 15 at 10:23 a.m.

  “Makes me wonder what name DAve hides under. He has to have one don’t you guys think?”—I often wonder. This is a corollary to this discussion. While I favor pseudonymity, I’m not a big fan of sock puppets for the same reasons.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 10:52 a.m.

  Sis, I’m in no way inclined nor do I desire to know who you are in real life, sheeesh. Great your accountable albeit not directly but through some network, to you again if your so interesting why not just use your name?
  Look, like I said, it’s no big deal. Just because I don’t care who you are and in the kings world I suppose honor me has some importance how does my not caring who you are make ignorance relevent. You tend to play by some form of moral compass rules, I said that already.
  Do you really think your speeches are that damaging, that enlightening, or whatever taht they would not have the same effect if you penned them with your real name. I mean, I haven’t seen the smatterings or a revolution in your words. One so dangerous that you had to hide your identity.
  In any case, your accountable, in your own way. Far out man, you are the exception to the rule.

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 10:54 a.m.

  FYI I guess Dave is,,,,ummm, Joker

• 

  Phaedrus on January 15 at 11:05 a.m.

  ejs, are you stuck at some airport gate waiting on a piece of equipment? Just wondering what has you so bored that you swoop in here on your high horse and create this HBO morality play. tell me, is pomposity something that can be divulged in the confessional?

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 15 at 11:07 a.m.

  haha, stealing your schtick is he Phaed?

  Its okay EJS, they called you a hypocrite for calling yourself a hypocrite, so all is good.

• 

  DFO on January 15 at 11:10 a.m.

  @ EJS re: “FYI I guess Dave is,,,,ummm, Joker”

  Some people think I’m The Bard, too. Doesn’t make it so. Still I’m flattered to be mistaken for either The Bard or Joker. Both have extremely strong points. If Joker starts writing poetry, you’ll know that I’m not him. I read poetry. But I don’t write it. However, mebbe that’d make Joker a candidate to be The Bard. Only the Shadow knows for sure. And, of course, I do, too.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 15 at 11:11 a.m.

  I didn’t mean to come off arrogant. No, for you its nothing groundbreaking, but there are many others in positions of power who would gladly penalize Sisyphus for his comments. I rail against some pretty significant people here in river city, and its not through some petty name calling which would be trollish and therefore easily disregarded as juvenile. And of course I’m no ‘founding father’ but I do think that viewpoints I, and others, espouse wouldn’t see the light of day but for pseudonymity, because of deeply red hue in, not only state government, but also the economic power structure as well. They would like me to go away. I know this because some of them have told me so. Mountain Goat is the most guarded among us because she’s a gay woman in rural Canyon County. And if you don’t think she’s a consummate professional in her work, or that she has a very real threat supporting her decision to strictly adhere to her pseudonymity, then we probably won’t see eye to eye on this.

• 

  nic on January 15 at 11:11 a.m.

  “Nic, your not anonymuus (sic)… Why not just use your real name then if your so open?”

  And I’ll add self contradiction to my list of why you’re irrelevant.

  “I don’t really care.” Why didn’t you just say that at the beginning?

• 

  Phaedrus on January 15 at 11:14 a.m.

  stealing your schtick is he Phaed?—CB,

  No. My “schtick” employs coherent logic, readable sentences and proper spelling. ;-)

• 

  ejs on January 15 at 11:39 a.m.

  Sis listen man, it’s all good just a topic for dialog, if I put on an air with this it wasn’t my intent.

  CB <wink> you nailed it.

  Nic, very mutual I assure you. :)

  Dave, I really didn’t think you were Joker just used it as starting point. ^5

• 

  Me on January 15 at 11:47 a.m.

  Phaed - don’t forget humilty …. wink wink

• 

  Phaedrus on January 15 at 12:34 p.m.

  Phaed - don’t forget humilty …. wink wink—Me

  Thanks, me, glad you noticed, I didn’t want to toot my own horn. ;-)

« Back to Huckleberries Online

• ›Scanner traffic