Married? Again?

[FreshFish]

Re: Married? Again?

I'm in favor of anonymity, and even I don't find your point #1 compelling. If someone is making comments that could influence a bond market, don't we want to know where those comments are coming from? Seems like it would be much easier for him to manipulate the market if he could do it anonymously.

If a person's comments actually were an attempt to manipulate a bond market, I'd agree with you entirely. However, the way FINRA regulations are worded, any comment whatsoever could be construed to be out of bounds, effectively silencing a person entirely from commenting on state and local politics (in electronic discussion boards, not in general; letters to the editor of a newspaper would be okay). Not sure how much experience you have had with regulators, they can be quite literal. What matters to them is how many scalps they can claim, it doesn't really matter so much whether those scalps were justified or "merely" were technicalities. Sort of like when police officers are given quotas on how many tickets they are supposed to write.)

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Married? Again?

While I generally agree, there are two good reasons in some cases to preserve anonymity.

1) in some cases, FINRA regulations put quite severe restrictions on what registered representatives can say. If I am a bond dealer, for example, and I want to comment on city or state politics, I might be in violation of FINRA regulations if I also buy and sell bonds issued by said city or state, since my comments might be construed as trying to influence the market price of said bonds.

2) in our Town, there are some incredibly petty and vindictive people in town government who have no qualms about singling out individuals for substantial harassment over property tax exemptions, building codes, business regulations, and the like. There is one citizen in our town who quite clearly complies with state law regarding a farmstead exemption for property taxes who also is an outspoken critic of the cronyism that is too rampant in our local government. he has spent years in court trying to get the town assessor to comply with state law regarding his property taxes.


Many of our Founding Fathers (why do we never hear about Founding Mothers??) published their pamphlets anonymously for fear of retribution.

Look at what happened in California to people who exercised their free speech rights over a ballot initiative when their names were publicized.

There are some dangerous people out there who do target folks for retribution over comments made in a local paper.

The founding fathers published anonymously because they were advocating a position treasonous in the eyes of the governing authority, something that even civilized nations, at the time, addressed at the end of a rope. I don't think that's quite what we're talking about here, nor do I think your local Council will hang you for saying mean things about them.

I guess I would leave you with this. If you have to hide behind the cloak of anonymity because of fear of what someone might think of or do to you, how free is your speech?

 

[Rover]

So, then, in your case, what explains your rude bullying behavior? were you sexually abused as a child and this is your way of getting revenge on the world ever after? or were you dropped on your head while very young and suffered permanent brain damage? Which one is it?

Oh please Fishy. I'm just telling it like it is.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: Married? Again?

The founding fathers published anonymously because they were advocating a position treasonous in the eyes of the governing authority, something that even civilized nations, at the time, addressed at the end of a rope. I don't think that's quite what we're talking about here, nor do I think your local Council will hang you for saying mean things about them.

I guess I would leave you with this. If you have to hide behind the cloak of anonymity because of fear of what someone might think of or do to you, how free is your speech?

Beyond the treasonous acts there were committing against the British crown, when submitting op-eds to newspapers or creating a political dialogue on any subject, not just those that could be seen as treasonous, a pen name was often adopted during the Enlightenment Period as a method of removing the idea of discussing the individual writing the piece and instead to discuss the content of the message. Long before thoughts of revolution were ever discussed, Benjamin Franklin wrote the Silense Dogood letters to the New-England Courant. Now, that's an extreme example as he created an entirely new persona, but it was a common thing during that age, to submit annonymous essays for print.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Married? Again?

Beyond the treasonous acts there were committing against the British crown, when submitting op-eds to newspapers or creating a political dialogue on any subject, not just those that could be seen as treasonous, a pen name was often adopted during the Enlightenment Period as a method of removing the idea of discussing the individual writing the piece and instead to discuss the content of the message. Long before thoughts of revolution were ever discussed, Benjamin Franklin wrote the Silense Dogood letters to the New-England Courant. Now, that's an extreme example as he created an entirely new persona, but it was a common thing during that age, to submit annonymous essays for print.

Interesting point. But I have to tell you, sometimes these Second Age of Enlightenment discussions between guys named after my dog and tonight's supper make me yearn for the Dark Ages.

 

[Rover]

Interesting point. But I have to tell you, sometimes these Second Age of Enlightenment discussions between guys named after my dog and tonight's supper make me yearn for the Dark Ages.

Just give the gubmint over to the GOP again and you'll be seeing the Dark Ages real soon.

For the record, Rover is short for Wild Rover an Irish drinking song. Nothing canine related...

 

[burd]

Re: Married? Again?

Beyond the treasonous acts there were committing against the British crown, when submitting op-eds to newspapers or creating a political dialogue on any subject, not just those that could be seen as treasonous, a pen name was often adopted during the Enlightenment Period as a method of removing the idea of discussing the individual writing the piece and instead to discuss the content of the message. Long before thoughts of revolution were ever discussed, Benjamin Franklin wrote the Silense Dogood letters to the New-England Courant. Now, that's an extreme example as he created an entirely new persona, but it was a common thing during that age, to submit annonymous essays for print.

There are still good reasons to write anonymously. I use this site under an assumed name because I am a very wealthy and important person who is an acknowledged expert in college hockey. When you become accustomed to people sucking up and kowtowing all the time, its actually nice to be insulted and treated like an idiot.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Married? Again?

I guess I would leave you with this. If you have to hide behind the cloak of anonymity because of fear of what someone might think of or do to you, how free is your speech?

YES, thank you! My point exactly!

Look at what happened to a prominent Romney backer in Idaho: I'm not quite sure of all the details, I'd have to track them down, but it resulted in something like an IRS audit, an OSHA visit, and an EPA enforcement action.

or supporters of Proposition 8 in CA who were "outed" (so to speak) and subject to harrassment there.

In a small town, the local government can be quite repressive as well. If you have to go to court repeatedly to get your rights enforced, even if you eventually win, you also lose money, time, perhaps reputation.

Respect for a difference of opinion seems to be on the wane.


I recall converations with my father, years ago:
"well, I think A is really important"
-- well, I agree that A is important, but to me, B is even more important
"Yes, I agree that B also is important, but to me A would be a higher priority"
-- well, we do agree that both A and B are important, and we differ on which is the higher priority then.

We could disagree yet remain respectful, and also acknowledge the validity of the other's position. I don't see much of that in public dialog any more.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Married? Again?

You guys are like little kids poking people with a stick to see what happens.

Haven't you ever visited the primate house at the zoo? it's in the genes, the posturing and chest-thumping is an integral part of who we are.

That's why we invented sports, to keep from killing each other.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Married? Again?

its actually nice to be insulted and treated like an idiot.

I guess you are in the right place then.

 

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: Married? Again?

There are still good reasons to write anonymously. I use this site under an assumed name because I am a very wealthy and important person who is an acknowledged expert in college hockey. When you become accustomed to people sucking up and kowtowing all the time, its actually nice to be insulted and treated like an idiot.

Is that you Barry Melrose? You do not know **** about college hockey

 

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: Married? Again?

There are still good reasons to write anonymously. I use this site under an assumed name because I am a very wealthy and important person who is an acknowledged expert in college hockey. When you become accustomed to people sucking up and kowtowing all the time, its actually nice to be insulted and treated like an idiot.

Is that you Barry Melrose? You do not know **** about college hockey

Hmmm....my guess was Virg Foss.

 

[burd]

Re: Married? Again?

Is that you Barry Melrose? You do not know **** about college hockey

HA! I can't tell you how many Badger fans I've seen who tried and failed to grow a good mullet. You know what's lacking? Class, baby. Class.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Married? Again?

You guys are like little kids poking people with a stick to see what happens.

I guess if it's a few fellas clowning around and posturing on a niche internet message board, it's either mildly droll or mildly annoying. When you have supposed "leaders" who are supposed to have responsibility to preserve the general welfare, and even have taken an oath promising to do the same, engaging in even more base posturing and chest-thumping, it's beyond annoying, it is alarming. The whole crew look like immature idiots across the board.

Oaths and promises and general welfare, who cares, if I can eke out a miniscule evanescent political advantage, eh? A pox on all of them.

 

[unofan]

I guess if it's a few fellas clowning around and posturing on a niche internet message board, it's either mildly droll or mildly annoying. When you have supposed "leaders" who are supposed to have responsibility to preserve the general welfare, and even have taken an oath promising to do the same, engaging in even more base posturing and chest-thumping, it's beyond annoying, it is alarming. The whole crew look like immature idiots across the board.

Oaths and promises and general welfare, who cares, if I can eke out a miniscule evanescent political advantage, eh? A pox on all of them.

Look everyone! The Fark Independent (tm) can be seen in this revived thread spouting his catchphrase, Both Sides Are Bad (So Vote Republican)!

 

[Priceless]

Re: Married? Again?

Look everyone! The Fark Independent (tm) can be seen in this revived thread spouting his catchphrase, Both Sides Are Bad (So Vote Republican)!

And pretending that les wasn't also talking about him!

 

[Rover]

Re: Married? Again?

How do you know which candidate lost a debate? When his supporters are calling it a draw afterwards.

How do you know Fishy's lost an argument? When he claims both sides are at fault.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Married? Again?

How do you know which candidate lost a debate? When his supporters are calling it a draw afterwards.

How do you know Fishy's lost an argument? When he claims both sides are at fault.

Now that's funny, right there.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Married? Again?

I'm more than a little surprised at how easily certain people take personal offense at even the slightest whiff of criticism directed toward their Anointed One. For people who find it so easy otherwise to mock the religious, it seems even more peculiar that they treat him like a Sacred Prophet who can do no wrong.

Even if it is purely factual, with absolutely no commentary attached.

Obama has not submitted a budget to Congress since elected. That is a fundamental core function of any chief executive. There is no rational way to defend him on this one particular point. the only sane response is to shake one's head ruefully and acknowledge the truth: "yeah, he let us down there." Facts are totally non-partisan. No matter what your race, creed, political or sexual orientation, age, gender, what have you, it doesn't matter: He has not submitted a budget.

Yet even to note that fact is viewed as heresy in some quarters. What, are we supposed to close our eyes, stick our fingers in our ears, and start humming loudly to ourselves instead? The very same people who savaged Bush and felt that somehow they were being good citizens in the process now are offended that Obama is observed to be less than perfect?

So what? How does that affect your own personal well-being? You and he are separate, different people. He doesn't even know who you are nor anything about you! Why this slavish devotion to a complete stranger?

If he were a religious icon, I could understand it. Deface Muhammed, Muslims are outraged. Put a crucifix in a cup of urine, Catholics and many Christians are offended. Use an American flag for toilet paper, burn it; veterans are offended.

But Obama? Seriously?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Married? Again?

Obama has sent budgets to Congess. What are you talking about?