About a month and a half ago, I opened up the comments section of the blog to readers without Google accounts, including those who wished to post anonymously. I'm pleased to say that this has actually been a boon to the blog, since most posts now receive many more comments – a lot more in some cases. That's good news overall, since I've wanted to foster discussion about the topics about which I write here, especially when my own opinion on a given matter might differ from conventional wisdom.
One of the drawbacks of allowing anonymous posts is that, in many the comments to many posts, it can be quite difficult differentiating one anonymous poster from another. That can lead to confusion and misunderstanding, something to which online written discussion is already quite prone. I don't know that there's a solution to this, but, if anyone has any ideas, I'd love to hear them. As I said, I'm mostly very happy with the reinvigorated comments sections, so I don't want to do anything that might stifle that. I simply wish it were easy to keep track of which anonymous poster was which.
Well. This is not really a 'solution', as you can still post as 'anyone', but perhaps it helps :
ReplyDeleteCurrently, you can choose to post as :
"1.) 'Your Google account'"
Which appears to be unique.
"2.) 'Anonymous'"
Which lists your response literally as 'anonymous'
"3.) 'Name / URL'"
Which forces you to come up with a name - which still can literally be 'anonymous' - but encourages you to come up with a name.
Perhaps if you drop option 2.), it would lead to better - but certainly not perfect - ways of differentiating poster x from poster y.
I go to the Name/URL option, type in the name my dear old Dad gave me, hit Continue, and enter my comment.
DeleteI expect many of us are on the lazy end of whichever spectrum you wish to apply, and don't know how to remain logged in. Knowing that it's a concern (or even an expressed preference) of yours at least gives us a nudge to do things differently. Yours, Aegrod
DeleteIs there a way of telling whether someone has used method 1 or 3?
DeleteI think so. If you use method 2 or 3, your "username" is black in color.
DeleteI'm not sure if that still is true for option 3 if you choose to also fill in an URL (instead of leaving that field blank), so I'm trying that here to see what happens. ;)
DeleteAh. You're right.
DeleteIt’s subtle, but the URL you posted has a different color than my username. Thanks for the experiment.
DeleteNo, I’m wrong: the color was different simply because I had previously visited the website you linked.
DeleteThe different color only appears because the URL I entered was a website you already visited (compared to the link to your blogspot profile that your 'name' links to and you probably have not visited recently), namely: "https://grognardia.blogspot.com/", and your browser displays/colors already visited links slightly different to unvisited links.
DeleteSo for this next experiment, I will enter a url you probably will not have visited, and see if it shows up in the same color as your name (and URL link).
DISCLAIMER: If this works, this post is not from the *real* 'Bonnacon' here, but someone else using 'option 3' to determine if this system allows you to 'impersonate' him/her.
DeleteOk, final experiment: If I choose 'option 3', but enter a name of a real existing and guaranteed to be unique google/blogspot account - and it's accompanying url link to their real blogspot profile - does it show up as indistinguishably from the real thing ?
I sincerely hope not, but even if it works, I doubt that malicious actors from toxic websites like ‘4chan’ end up here to start impersonating people just to mess with people and troll.
So now that I've done this - and unfortunately it seems to have worked - I feel I have an apology to make to the real Bonnacon. Sorry.
DeleteI really have no reason to believe that anyone will use this in a malicious way, but I still think that it is good to realize that when you have the option to insert random and unverified name/url input, that is not protected by at least a password, you leave the system open to this kind of thing.
And again, apologies to Bonnacon.
yeah, it's very confusing. I suspect that many anons are regular readers/commenters, and if they could just adopt some pseudonymous initials (per post, not lifetime pseudonyms) as a matter of politeness, it would help
ReplyDeleteI have never been able to log in through my Google account on my phone so I much appreciate having the ability to comment anonymously. Can’t remember if I have yet but I am sure I will.
ReplyDeleteNext “Comment as:” is Anonymous, followed by a little down arrow. If you click that arrow and select Name/URL, you can then type in whatever you would like, select “Continue”, and post your comment. Sans “Google Account”.
DeleteOn your phone browser go to settings/site settings/allow 3rd party cookies and it will allow you to log in. It's site specific so you won't be getting them from every site. I just fixed it for myself that way.
DeletePerhaps all the “Anonymous” comments are indeed from one prolific poster who has multiple personality disorder?
ReplyDeleteJust spitballing here….
I appreciate being able to now make comments here. I have wanted to before but my attempts wouldn’t work. - Dave V
ReplyDeleteThank you for making it easier to post comments. I have wanted to in the past but Google wouldn’t let me.
ReplyDeleteIt was me. I did it. And I will do it again
ReplyDeleteI think Dave V has demonstrated the solution. Just sign your name.
ReplyDeleteStephen Vossler
But are Dave V and David V the same person?
DeleteThey sure seem to think similarly... :)
DeleteI have been forced to comment anonymously for the last month or two because my personal laptop crapped out and for some reason when I try to log in with my google account it shows my wife's account and there's no way I can see to change it. I'm sure it's a simple thing to fix but I haven't had the time to investigate.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy the discussion here and over the last couple of years as I've gradually read through your back log of posts I've had to stop myself from commenting on something you wrote years ago. You have a great base of readers, which is fitting because you're pretty great yourself, James.
That’s one disadvantage of this blog setup: active threads don’t move to the top, so while James will see comments on old posts, it’s likely few others will take notice. It disinclines me to comment on anything more than a few days old and I often don’t have time to comment immediately.
Delete...sometimes, in my haste to comment, i simply forget that the non-anonymous option exists until after i hit 'publish'...
ReplyDeleteI don’t post very often but I’m another lazy Anon poster. I’ll try to do better with posting as a user name.
ReplyDeleteI use inoreader for blogs. Those that have a comment feed make it easy to follow all the comments.
ReplyDeleteLike so many others, I comment as Anonymous when I can't sort out my Google account login.
ReplyDeleteYou stopped allowing comments by anonymous posters on June 3, 2008. I’ve been waiting since then for you to reopen anonymous comments, so that I can tell you this very important thing:
ReplyDelete….
….
Aaaaand I’ve forgotten what it was. Nevermind.
I actually only started reading your blog in earnest a couple of days ago, as part of my desire to find any information about 0d&d, and what an interesting walk through recent-ish history it has been. You started the blog when 4e was just starting up. Gary Gygax had already passed to his reward, the month before. George W. Bush was still President. That seems a lifetime ago.
In any case, good job with the blog. I see you are refereeing “Dolmenwood”, and am wondering if you are going to write about it.
I will probably write about Dolmenwood at some point, yes. The campaign I'm refereeing is still new-ish – it began in January of this year, I believe – so there's not much to say about it yet. That would undoubtedly change with time.
Delete