--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002" <danfriedman2002@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Turq,
>
> For clarification: I attempted to have an author associated with the post.
> Probably a good idea for all posts to have attribution, so there is not an an
> annonymous rash of posts. Who thinks of revenge for that?
>
> This leads to your second paragraph: I do feel that people are responsible
> for their acts. That is my purpose for objecting to annonymous posting.
Dan, you may not be aware of it, but anonymity is a fundamental building block
for democracy and freedom. For example secret ballot is essential for the
freedom of a country and it's citiziens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_ballot
"The secret ballot is a voting method in which a voter's choices in an election
or a referendum are confidential. The key aim is to ensure the voter records a
sincere choice by forestalling attempts to influence the voter by intimidation
or bribery. The system is one means of achieving the goal of political privacy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_privacy
"Uncertainty about who supported what measure, and the right to keep one's
opinion to oneself and not be required to reveal it except voluntarily (such as
by joining a political party or answering opinion polls), aren't generally
challenged even by the most strident national security advocates."
The idea is of course to avoid any group from exerting pressure on you, or to
influence you, or sanction you in any way.
A good example of this power of anonymity is Wikileaks. It is clear that those
who provide information to Wikileaks must fear repressions of all kinds, just
recently conservatives have demanded the death for its founder. It is such a
system that provides transparency that is needed in any democratic system.
Of course you do not have to agree to the psychologist, but he has the right to
give his opinion, and of course anonymously. TM has never been known to be a
democratic system, and control *is* a big issue there.
