spin

Do not respond to this person. Setting such terms on a forum which clearly works with nicks means that he isn't acting as a member of the BC&W community.

Note also that he frequently responds to posters who do not sign their real name.

Responding merely feeds him.


s.p.in

Solitary Man

Here's his curriculum vitae. I've seen his name cited in my books several times.

Roger Pearse

I cannot speak for anyone else, but I tend to find that some (not all) anonymous posters behave considerably worse than they would if their real name was attached to their activities. The sense of shame diminishes, it seems, rather as Restoration rakes who wore masks were a danger to anyone they came across. This is particularly visible in usenet, where the dirtiest trolls are all anonymous. This is less of a problem in a moderated forum such as this one, but I can see the point of the demand. I don't think that there are many on my extensive ignorelist who are not anonymous, for instance.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

DCHindley

You have to understand that Jeffrey comes from an environment where discussion boards use real names as SOP. The idea is that anonymity makes it too easy to be sloppy about what one says, or worse yet be rude and condescending. It's not that scholars do not stoop to that kind of thing on a bad day, but it is relatively rare to see that in his Crosstalk2 and Corpus Paul discussion lists, or in similar "academic" lists.

Also, and I do not want to speak for Jeffrey, I get the impression that it irks him no end when someone makes assertions beyond his or her actual knowledge. For instance, if someone does not know Greek, he does not like to see absolute statements based on the language coming from the person. On the other hand, I would think that if the person offered a qualification, say "For instance, Dr So And So, in _Some Specific Academic Oriented Tome_, pages xx-yy, argues that this Greek clause can be taken to say ...", he would accept that.

DCH

Ben C Smith

I sincerely doubt Jeffrey would disagree with this assessment of his likes and dislikes!

Ben.

Sheshonq

Then perhaps he should look around here: this is a different environment that where he is used to. And it has a different paradigm for interaction among the participants; anonymity is well-ingrained here. So Jeffrey's attempt to enforce a set of behaviors from some other environment when there is already a different, robust culture present here seems doomed from the outset. Jeffrey isn't going to re-mold the culture here just because he's used to something else. "When in Rome...."

I understand the principle. However, it's rather silly; there's no fact-checking mechanism to prove that someone is giving a *real* name, vs. a made-up name. It's the internet; proof is hard.

Besides, Jeffrey's given us his real name and in spite of that has still managed to be sloppy and bordering on rude in his posting. Apparently giving one's real name is not a safeguard against such behavior.

DCHindley, I understand that you are just trying to clarify what you suspect was Jeffrey's reason, and obviously I don't expect you to answer any of the above points. I'm just trying to show that the reasons aren't very plausible. And because of that I don't really believe they are Jeffrey's reasons after all.

A lot of people on this board are experts in their fields, whatever that may be. Jeffrey might do well to remember that this forum is not a lecture hall for a 100-level class; this is more like a faculty lounge, with many other well-educated people. Just as I would expect a professor of archaeology to give due respect to a professor of physics, I would expect Jeffrey to not engage in hypocritical behavior by trashing someone else or raising a string of pointless drive-by innuendos.

spin

Would all the sock-puppets please stand up?