I was personally ambivalent about anonymity on the mailing list.

However, the fact that it appears to be predominantly men arguing for
banning anonymity and women arguing for allowing it is a tell that us
men folk might have our lower appendages in our orifices.

cheers
stuart
--
...let us be heard from red core to black sky

On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 14:12, Edward Almasy
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> On Jul 14, 2019, at 8:36pm, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > IMHO, the Code4Lib mailing list should not be akin to an anonymous chat room where anyone can come in and say whatever they desire under the cloak of anonymity.
> > One must be accountable for what they say, and accountability is increased by knowledge of the source. It is similar to information literacy and citing one's references so the validity of an argument can be substantiated.
>
> There is also the issue of bias.  Knowing, for example, that someone is from an institution or organization that has invested heavily in a particular platform or toolset can help put their views or advocacy into context.
>
> I think allowing anonymous or pseudonymous posts in this context decreases the integrity and value of the discourse.
>
> Ed
>
>
> --
> Edward Almasy <[log in to unmask]>
> Director  •  Internet Scout Research Group
> Computer Sciences Dept  •  U of Wisconsin - Madison
> 1210 W Dayton St  •  Madison WI 53706  •  3HCV+J6
> 608-262-6606 (voice)  •  608-265-9296 (fax)