Fedmahn Kassad

Looks like Jimmy Higgins adopted that statement as his signature. Every one of his posts has that moderator's comment at the end.

FK

Jimmy Higgins

*poof*

Fedmahn Kassad

Hey Minnesota,

I saw that you had a post nuked very quickly. As soon as I saw that a post had been made to the "Least Favorite Creationist" thread, I went to read it and it was already deleted. What did you write?

FK

Joe Meert

I have to admit that while I don't necessarily see anything wrong with posting under a pseudonym, I don't do it. I've been posting to a variety of websites and posting my own material on the web for over 7 years. I can honestly say that using my own name has not resulted in any flood of spam, hate mail or any other negative consequences. I simply feel that if I am to offer my opinion on these matters, it's best to do so openly. At the very least I agree that people like Sarfati and Woodmorappe are real hypocrites because they are not merely 'posting' under a pseudonym, they are truly hiding behind it.

Cheers

Joe Meert

RBH

Hm. Is this the same "Joe Meert" who said last year: tum te tum te tum.

RBH

Minnesota

Kassad


It was a huge, blue, scrolling message that simply said "Socrates = Sarfati"

pangloss

I think there is a big difference between a pseudonym and an online 'handle.' I have visited online forums that require participants to use 'handles', rather than their real names.

While the difference seems semantical (handle v. pseudonym), as others have mentioned, it is what you do with it. Clearly, my name is not "pangloss." This was one of the first boards I ever accessed, and adopted that handle as I had recently read Candide and that was the only name that came to mind. On other boards, I have used my real name, or more regularly, my initials. I have also used Huxter on a couple of boards. However, I have never denied being me, that is, on a board where I posted as 'Huxter' and someone might ask "Hey, are you pangloss from infidels or SLP from EvC?" would say yes.

As I pointed out with the ReMine-Laser Thing debacle, cretins seem to use pseudonyms to try to adopt a unique identity for the purposes of furthering their agendas. And so Laser-thing spews about how great ReMine's work is; Socrates heaps accolades upon Sarfati and the AiG crowd; Woodmorappe ... well, I don't what his story is. Actually, I have heard form several independant sources that Pezcis leads a rather crappy homelife and his creationist rantings are an escape fo sorts...

gotta run...

New Atheist

I don't usually post in these forums, because frankly the whole evolution debate bores me, but I've been looking at these Theology Web threads and visited the forums myself, sort of as a way to pass my time. I just wanted to say my opinion on the whole pseudonym thing though. Personally I find the anonymity on the internet one of the greatest advantages of the medium. I can pretty much post and chat anywhere I want without having to fear I'll be flooded by junk mail, or that somebody who knows me and shouldn't see what I do or write finds me. In a way it lets you be more free, and be more like yourself because your npot afraid of some consequence in your real life. Of course in most cases it doesn't matter for me if somebody knows who I really am. I can see though why some people might prefer to be anonymous. I'll be controversial and I'll go on and defend Sarfati. You all know he's Socrates. Sarfati is sort of a 'leading' figure in the whole Creation movement... hardly something to be proud of, but I take it he feels proud of himself for that. He wants to participate in a discussion forum... and for whatever reason wants to be anonymous. I can see why in my opinion. Perhaps he feels that if it becomes known that Sarfati post on a message board, he will be flooded by evolutionists who want to challenge one of the big names in the creation scene, or he feels that if it is not known who he is, then he can express himself better... which is true I guess, knowing that his debating tactics are not the most civil around, he wouldn't want a bunch of sites coming up declaring "Look at the way Dr. Sarfati of AiG likes to debate, is this the scientist you believe?", and thus had his identity been known he would have to be more civil, this actually not being himself. Perhaps he doesn't want to link the entire AiG organisation to what he writes in the forums, prefering to go solo against the evolutionists. In any case, he chooses to be anonymous, and it is my belief that everybody on the internet has a right to do so. Also, while in the course of debates if he comes across a topic on which he has written a paper at, I can't see any reason why he can't link to said paper. Yes, providing a link followed by "Look at what this amazing great scientist has written:" tells something of his ego, but i do not see it unethical. If he wants to be anonymous for whatever reason, and on the other hand wants to point to a paper of the highest standard (which admitedly for any of us would be something written by ourself), then he really has no other choice but to link to it without saying he is the author.
I also remember in one of the threads, I can't remember where, somebody saying that these people have chosen to publish in the internet and have chosen to be involved in the internet, so they have forfeited their right to anonymity... I'm sorry but I can't see the logic in this... and as free thinkers I can't see why anyone of you should. Is there some law that says once I've publishes something in one website I can't be anonymous in a forum? So say if I'm some celebrity who's written a vast amount of really famous articles and I want to join a forum without everybody going "OH AND LOOK AT WHAT YOU WROTE HERE!!!" or "THAT ARTICLE YOU PUBLISHED AT THAT DATE WAS JUST SO...", I can't do so? Why? Everybody has a right to anonymity on an internet board nomatter what whether he's pubished before or not.
So to conclude I think any attempts to try to 'reveal' who Socrates is are simply immateur. You all know who he is, but what good does it make if you are debating "Socrates" or "Socrates admitting he is Sarfati?" Focus on his arguements (however few they are) and not on his name.
And finally just to point out, as I said I've been to TWeb, and I've actually seen the way Socrates likes to debate... and I can understand your frustration. I would take it as some sort of revenge to reveal who he is, and personally even though I tell you what I think and what I think the correct thing is, I don't know if myself I would have taken my advice and not tried to make the guy mad to reveal who he is. A kind of hypocritical last paragraph out of me I know...

Joe Meert

JM: Yup, I sure could. BUT I DON'T! In fact, anyone can do that.
Cheers

Joe Meert

RBH

JM - I was KIDDING! I ran onto that coincidentally in a search for something else completely unconnected with you, and couldn't resist.

RBH