Shared publicly  - 
Arthur Reynolds's profile photoMike Minor's profile photoJörgen Rosenling (lingonsprigg)'s profile photoAmelia Blake's profile photo
Oh no! Yes, "Big Brother is watching you". Facebook is like that too, they decide who you should add as friends, no more privacy on the internet, or maybe there never was.
Most sites I've seen that allow anonymous posting also have either moderators, or user voting which hides posts that get a certain number of down votes. It pretty much takes care of itself - sort of counter-bullies the bully. And personally, unless they demonstrate that they know me or very private info about me, an anonymous online bully is easily brushed off as a cowardly jerk anyway.
+Nellie K. Adaba - The Internet has always been an open, public forum. Anyone who's ever thought it was a safe place to keep things secret is delusional or ignorant of how the Internet works. But, by the same token, governments trying to clamp down on the Internet are equally delusional and ignorant.
Please? Big brother save us all!!! IDIOTS !!
My bad, was that cyber bullying or just free speech?
Idiots. 1st Amendment trumps this easily.
The First Amendment doesn't protect your right to speak anonymously. It just protects your speech. Accountability is a good thing. We have something similar in the real world. I agree with this 100%.
With all that is happening in the world today, not as easily as you might think. National Security is now being touted as a legitimate exception to the Freedom of Speech position. Mr. Westcott said it well. I think those of you looking to ride on the high horse of the First Amendment might find that horse a bit lame in the foot when the race commences.
I hear all these comments about freedom of speech, but why are so many of these "free speakers" hiding behind a anonymous cloak? If you have something to say at least stand up for who you are and not post it as anonymous (cowards).
+Marty Goetting - I agree in cases where they do it on purpose. But I've posted anonymously at times because I didn't want to take/waste the time to set up an account on the site I was posting to. That's a rare case, though.
Because speaking against the establishment earns identified people and their loved ones severe punishment +Marty Goetting.
+Marty Goetting because some of the stuff I've posted about my company would cost me my job. no I don't consider that's cowardice on my part, not everyone is open to criticism and some of them can ruin your life.
+Marty Goetting You seriously can't imagine any possible use for anonymous comments?! Try looking at it from the other angle, why do they want anonymous posts banned? So people can be punished for their views.
+Jerome A. F Ideally you'd pick your words well. If the place you work is monitoring what you say online then don't say anything at all. If you wouldn't yell it from a public street corner, you shouldn't post it online. If you have criticism for your company, you should talk to your supervisor, HR, or another entity that can help you. If there is no way to fix what you are unhappy about or are complaining about, you should work at finding a new job.

No one is saying that accountability is easy. I think we are just saying it is fundamental to society - include those that exist on the Internet.
+Benjamin Allen People can have views, but some of these people just go off half cocked because they hide. Should you be allowed to threaten someone online because you can hide from being? Man up, if you feel strongly about something don't hide from it, stand up for it no matter the result. I go off about Apple and others a lot and do it unanonymously, they can't do anything about an opinion of mine about my perceived idea of who they are and how they act.
+Christopher Westcott but why do I have to self-censor and choose my words or even refrain from posting it online? my company is public company, why shouldn't I be able to take the discussion to a wider audience, and restrict it between my supervisors and HR?
Maybe you should find another place to work if their are issues that are that compelling for you.
+Jerome A. F You can do that! Even if you don't post anonymous no one is taking away that ability. The issue here is that you have to deal with the consequences. You are basically saying - "Why can't I say what I want and not have consequences?" If you are fine with the negative consequences from saying those things, then by all means, otherwise don't take that avenue. Moreover, all employment is at will. You can be fired at any time for any reason (largely) and you can also leave at any time, for any reason.

Do what you want but just be willing to pay the price. If the price of bashing your employer is your job, then be OK with that and bash away!
Isn't that called "talking behind someones back" ;)
Why? It seems to me the burden to is on those who support banning anonymity to prove that the benefits of such a ban would outweigh restricting a right. Which, so far as I can tell, is going to be a pretty tough sell.

It's the responsibility of the reader to, usually, disregard anything said by an anonymous.
+Jake Miller That's exactly what I personally do myself, if you can't talk to me straight as who you are I'll generally just take what you say with a grain of salt.
I agree with the intentions of the idea. In regards to bullying, if you were capable of saying it, you should be capable of of owning up to it. It does, however, open up Pandora's box and invites an unnecessary attack on privacy. they use their own name when noone will listen to them who are suppose to be km business of protecting them? No they go to the public at that point and to protect themselves they must be Anon. Damn mindless followers. Make it so noone is protected when speaking out. Notice how they state speaking against political officials. Tell me how easy it is to prove what you have to say against an elected official and anyone to take you seriously? And in NY i'm sure i'll get some help with my point here.
The bullying scenario has always been a front with which your rights will be taken from you. Ask your grandparents how they delt with bullying when they saw it. Id guess that they took action themselves and delt with it like a moral individual who felt obligated to handle a terrible situation they were witness to. They didn't complain to the state or gov to solve the issue which is what you people do now.
As the internet grows, it will change. But the ways governments are trying to go after it is almost always violations of human rights. (e.g. free speech)
Personally I think of you're going to make, particularly negative, comments you should sack up and own them...
+Christopher Westcott the point is there should be no consequence. what people are arguing is anonymity protects people from unjust punishment.
+Jake Miller their rationale is "someone is mean on the internet and I'm upset", first world problem.
no,banning comments won't change anything i guess
More rights under consideration to be removed? Can we all say 'Police State'?
+Marty Goetting No, threatening someone online shouldn't be 'allowed'; that's why there are already laws against it and people going to prison for it!
+Mike Minor what rights are being stripped away? Admittedly I'm Australian so I'm not completely down with all you're 'rights' (of which there seem to be a lot and you're all very concerned with them) but its not like they're saying you can't comment, just have the balls to own them. Pretty sure theres no right to anonymity...
We must never forget those who lives under hard and suppressed conditions and can't express their opinion without risking their lives.
Except for a couple of my accounts (like this one), I never use my real name. In those other accounts I don't act different than the ones with my real name: I just don't want my name plastered all over the net. (and that last part is especially true for one of my friends, who has a name the same of only one other person in the whole country)

I'm not sure if these law makers ever used Facebook, Twitter, Google+, etc. but maybe they've never noticed THE FLAG ON EVERYTHING TO REPORT ANYTHING.

How would they even enforce real names for New York online, anyway? Email your ID to Facebook? Try to tell me companies will want to hire people to check IDs, check through everybody already using their service, etc. And how do they enforce a person living in New York to say they live in New York?

It's something impossible to enforce, bad for businesses, and limiting rights.
How would they even try to enforce this?
+jez bragg theoretically, you have the right to represent yourself in any manner that you choose. Be it a straight forward manner, that addresses your real identity, or though any legal form of proxy.

Just imagine if you could no longer use any form of Avatar to represent yourself on any Internet provided service and you had to use your Drivers License or ID photo, only! That takes away part of the alleged freedom to express one's self, in any manner that they so choose. The beauty of the Internet is that it is a place without the standard restrictions of any one governing body. It is global and represents freedom from any oppressive and totalitarianistic type of regulation.

To have governments come in a watch everything that you do on the Internet and govern what you can and can not do, or control how you can do what you do, effectively destroys some of the basic ideals that made the Internet what it is today.

There are people out there, who must post anonymously, to get their message out there, for fear of reprisal against them or their loved ones! And that is not only within 'Oppressive' countries, but even within allegedly 'Free' countries such as the U.S.! The U.S. Government is hiding under the Patriot Act to allow it to monitor and control the use of the Internet where ever possible.

If the 'terrorists' disliked America's way of life and want it changed, then they are accomplishing that goal with the help of the Government it'self! Our way of life has indeed changed significantly over the past decade, we now live under the guise of fear! "Mission Accomplished!" GWB!

I digress, Americans tend to be more sensitive to any personal 'rights' being taken away, a) partially because it is one of the primary things that made this country great and b) over the years there seems to be an obvious (possibly nefarious) intention to erode these individual rights, one law at a time.

This seems to be the more broad method of controlling the masses by directing their behavior into a specific direction, by threat of litigation rather than by the more traditional methods (guilt, religion/faith, peer pressure, family/moral values, tradition, etc.)

This particular proposed act is relatively small, but they do add up over time.
Of course people should be able to have anonymous comments.
Add a comment...