Should this board be for registered members only?

[gloworm]

Felix - I'm with you here. <br>Since, thank you Jeff for opening this topic - Registered or not - here's my question in a rather hypothetical mode and taking freedom of speech, greviously under attack, to a deeper and somewhat paranoid mode, and, mind you, at and over which I laugh, when I am not wresling, fighting, lamenting in sackcloth and ashes, praying and weeping: <br>- IF I were a social-psychol. and/or spiritual engineer, well FUNDED,<br> -IF on the scheme of gov. things which we, the curious and intelligently serious here, gather that we have been funding such social, etc. engineering research for at least some 40 yrs., as is more simply evidenced in such as our "academic" curriculums ... <br> - IF our gov. is experimenting and testing some of their fancy hi-tech equipment, EM-negativeEM-scaler-whatever, on US, which legislation that allows this is somewhere in that absurd congressional record ...<br>Well, somebody has the registration info. But I don't think this would be as important as the information that "they" could reap using such nice formats as FREE ez-boards, yahoo group discussions, etc. to asess the public's "take" on issues maybe just to help "them" conjure up new angles or IMPplement the next strategic curve ball.<br><br> Most of what I read here in R.I. seems to me to have a very honest intelligence quality. I also think that "they"re one up on us because of the personnal hidden identity inherent in such discussions. I mean there's a meeting taking place here which is nakedly a meeting of MINDS. And while true spiritual discernment CAN take place on any level which most often is a kind of Intuition, it is usually rather only partial without being able to see eyes to eyes, to physically watch over time, to observe any deeds in whatever community, that such and such a whole person is about. -- Probably many of us on this board upon that last statement have an instant memory scan taking place that remembers someone who with time was concluded to have some kind of hidden agenda, betrayal, weakness, etc. <br><br>Maybe the answer is already here in Jeff's R.I. introduction that I've not taken time to read. But I expound on Felix's input in that IF I were Jeff, would I feel overwhelmed, frightened, powerful; would I be experiencing probes into my personnal pc world - would I (you/he cuz I sure as heck wouldn't know) recognize them? Not that I have to have the answers to these questions--probably subconsciously I don't want to know these answers and thank you for this opportunity to learn and share.!<br> Fca. <p></p><i></i>

[Friedbean]

I was just worried about the fact that if that dragon kid could cause such a "kurffafle" alone, then this board would be trounced by an organized "attack".<br>It would be awful to not have this board in Any case.<br>I would be willing to donate time or money to creating some kind of backup or security so we never loose you.<br><br>Thanks again for the insight.<br><br>Dylan<br> <p></p><i></i>

[ir]

Being registered has several editting/technical advantages, more options (quote, image etc.) and the subject line is automatically inserted to the message and there is a message box, of course.<br>disadvantage is psychological, at least for me, I feel more "shielded" being unregistered. From what ? don't know just a feeling of being more anonymous.<br><br>--<br>In terms of policies - it is a decision on the nature of the board. Some communities demand not only registration but pre-approval by moderator, in email describing why they should be admitted. So that the moderator actually has all the real identities in store while assigning passwords. this is usually the case in survivors' boards where people want to be protected from perps or press etc. the other end is an all open, no censureship no identification requirement . Under this format only spam or unlawful speech is deleted, and if persists - user is banned. The board here is a sui generis community in my (limited) experience, and so the rules are probably being made along the way and so are decisions on goals. <br>--<br>I am an extremist, so I think each of the extreme forms are good. But half measures, I think are risking the sense of arbitrary decisions who to ban or delete. This can be percieved as an experiment in creating a community (virtual, but that's something). Personally, if this is not a closed club with identifiable participants than banning should not exist, except very very rarely. Since I was already branded as too tolerant to nazis, I will hold to that position. But then I am coming from a very censored environment, and my NEED is for FREEDOM. Freedom to be exposed to people and opinions which I would NOT normaly be able to hear in Israel. This allows me to get to the bottom of things rather than accept someone else's judgement on what should or should not be uttered in public. Your society is open, usually, to most opinions, so you might be more concerned with keeping a focus and a certain political repuatation among the various other communtiies/blogs from the radical left. <br>In my blog I delete many many back talks, because I feel that a blog is a home, and I want to keep it pleasant for ME. but Jeff's blog has gone beyond a blog, it is a news-service, therapy, prophecy and community. I wouldn't know how to deal with it anyway. <br> <p></p><i></i>

[ir]

Just noticed that since Bush/Iraq era - the word freedom sounds sleezy. i should choose a different term. <p></p><i></i>

[mother]

I think registering is OK because it gives us an idea of the interest in the discussions. I also think that it would be good to ban people only under extreme (as in dangerous) circumstances. There have been postings which have made me very uncomfortable, but that is good for learnig. Sometimes there are words that feel hateful, but if heated arguements are forbidden, if subjects are taboo then this board will gradually become mediocre. I think the people who were banned would have settled down after awhile or gotten bored and found some other place to be churlish. <p></p><i></i>

[chiggerbit]

Seems like there are two subjects going on here simultaneously, banning and registering. I am very glad RI banned the idiot. I've seen someone just like that one (a kid, maybe?) trash a site with their spamming. Spammers, and those who only post so they can link traffic to their own site day after day after day, and the crazies are deadly to a serious site. We have lost enough thoughtful, intelligent posters. I miss them. I'm not saying that we all need to register, but I certainly have no problem with banning the spammers. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 12/21/05 7:59 pm<br></i>

[starroute]

It isn't what registration requires so much as what people might think it requires -- and those who value their privacy most are likely to shy away from it on the basis of what they fear.<br><br>Even on the blog, there are Anonymouses who remain anonymous because they are afraid of entering any sort of identification at all, no matter how ad hoc. <br><br>Let's not raise any more barriers to participation than need be.<br> <p></p><i></i>