Why do firm rankings matter? Forum

[dresden doll]

I've at least once NOT posed a question on TLS I otherwise would have because of fear of reprisal.

We aren't talking about anonymous postings of porn or dead baby photos. People really need to chill out.

Very rarely does posting a legit question result in a shitshow for the OP. Sure, you might elicit scornful responses from a jerk or two, but chances are, they'll be called out by more decent posters for their jabs.

I'd say that those who are bothered by a couple of such responses to legit inquiries need to chill out to at least the same extent as those who complain about the abuse of the anonymous feature.

[miamiman]

I've at least once NOT posed a question on TLS I otherwise would have because of fear of reprisal.

We aren't talking about anonymous postings of porn or dead baby photos. People really need to chill out.

Very rarely does posting a legit question result in a shitshow for the OP. Sure, you might elicit scornful responses from a jerk or two, but chances are, they'll be called out by more decent posters for their jabs.

I'd say that those who are bothered by a couple of such responses to legit inquiries need to chill out to at least the same extent as those who complain about the abuse of the anonymous feature.

Fair. Even still, I just don't get why people care so much about users posting anonymously. Does it really change the mood/usefulness/(insert any other apt noun) of a thread when someone posts a reasonable question anonymously? It's one of those weird TLS pet peeves I'll never understand OR, perhaps more appropriately, have not yet been convinced is legitimate.

[bk1]

I don't think we are or have ever been treading on slippery slope territory in this thread. The user anonymously inquired about the importance of rankings as they pertain to bigfirms, firms which admittedly are a rather objectively homogenous bunch. The user disclaimed his use of the anonymous feature by saying he believed not doing so would result in ridicule rather than constructive feedback. I don't think such a fear makes this user unique or crazy; I've at least once NOT posed a question on TLS I otherwise would have because of fear of reprisal.

We aren't talking about anonymous postings of porn or dead baby photos. People really need to chill out.

Using anon does not stop ridicule, it is absurd to think it would. The poster just gets ridiculed as "OP" rather than their user name and then ridiculed on top of that for using anon.

I understand the fear of reprisal, but not how it justifies using the anon feature which exists solely for hiding. Does being made fun of on an internet forum suck? I guess it does, especially if you enjoy posting here. But just like getting made fun of in high school, get over it and move on. It blows but it isn't the end of the world.

If the ridicule would damage you in such a way that it would hurt your person in some way (such as making it harder to find a job or something similar), I could understand using anon. Otherwise it should be off limits for such casual use.

[miamiman]

I don't think we are or have ever been treading on slippery slope territory in this thread. The user anonymously inquired about the importance of rankings as they pertain to bigfirms, firms which admittedly are a rather objectively homogenous bunch. The user disclaimed his use of the anonymous feature by saying he believed not doing so would result in ridicule rather than constructive feedback. I don't think such a fear makes this user unique or crazy; I've at least once NOT posed a question on TLS I otherwise would have because of fear of reprisal.

We aren't talking about anonymous postings of porn or dead baby photos. People really need to chill out.

Using anon does not stop ridicule, it is absurd to think it would. The poster just gets ridiculed as "OP" rather than their user name and then ridiculed on top of that for using anon.

I understand the fear of reprisal, but not how it justifies using the anon feature which exists solely for hiding. Does being made fun of on an internet forum suck? I guess it does, especially if you enjoy posting here. But just like getting made fun of in high school, get over it and move on. It blows but it isn't the end of the world.

If the ridicule would damage you in such a way that it would hurt your person in some way (such as making it harder to find a job or something similar), I could understand using anon. Otherwise it should be off limits for such casual use.

OK. But, we're still getting back to the fundamental question: what is so wrong with minor abuses of the anonymous feature? I don't buy the argument that it cheapens anonymity such that the mods would take the privilege away.

[dresden doll]

I've at least once NOT posed a question on TLS I otherwise would have because of fear of reprisal.

We aren't talking about anonymous postings of porn or dead baby photos. People really need to chill out.

Very rarely does posting a legit question result in a shitshow for the OP. Sure, you might elicit scornful responses from a jerk or two, but chances are, they'll be called out by more decent posters for their jabs.

I'd say that those who are bothered by a couple of such responses to legit inquiries need to chill out to at least the same extent as those who complain about the abuse of the anonymous feature.

Fair. Even still, I just don't get why people care so much about users posting anonymously. Does it really change the mood/usefulness/(insert any other apt noun) of a thread when someone posts a reasonable question anonymously? It's one of those weird TLS pet peeves I'll never understand OR, perhaps more appropriately, have not yet been convinced is legitimate.

Well, I'm not exactly shaking in anger or mass pming mods about anonymous feature abuses. I just noted it was annoying in general, which it IMO is.

[clintonius]

OK. But, we're still getting back to the fundamental question: what is so wrong with minor abuses of the anonymous feature? I don't buy the argument that it cheapens anonymity such that the mods would take the privilege away.

You don't understand slippery slope. You don't "tread on a slippery slope" in one thread any more than you do so with a single act of policy -- it's a cumulative, downward effect that clearly isn't going to happen in one thread. And hey, I even said I don't think it would happen at all, at least not in a major way. I still see the mods' reasons for not wanting the anon feature subject to minor abuse, because then minor abuse becomes the norm, and...

edit:

Well, I'm not exactly shaking in anger or mass pming mods about anonymous feature abuses. I just noted it was annoying in general, which it IMO is.

also this. It's annoying. That's my primary complaint. The justification I provided earlier was meant as more of a policy-side argument.

[bk1]

OK. But, we're still getting back to the fundamental question: what is so wrong with minor abuses of the anonymous feature? I don't buy the argument that it cheapens anonymity such that the mods would take the privilege away.

Maybe, maybe not.

I see it as minor abuses creates more work for the mods. The mods only have a certain amount of time that they can police. The mods may summarily remove the feature to remove that workload and solve the problem.

While it isn't a guarantee, there isn't any reason to engage in minor abuses. If people can be sufficiently persuaded not to do them (by being outed or given temporary bans or something similar) then there is less work for the mods to do in the end. These abuses don't guarantee that it will be taken away, but I feel that the chance is not worth the risk considering the value of the anon feature for people posting actual sensitive material. So why risk it by letting minor infractions go?

[bk1]

Fair. Even still, I just don't get why people care so much about users posting anonymously. Does it really change the mood/usefulness/(insert any other apt noun) of a thread when someone posts a reasonable question anonymously? It's one of those weird TLS pet peeves I'll never understand OR, perhaps more appropriately, have not yet been convinced is legitimate.

I think the real reason is that we on TLS like to ridicule and argue and that this is just another outlet for that.

[miamiman]

OK. But, we're still getting back to the fundamental question: what is so wrong with minor abuses of the anonymous feature? I don't buy the argument that it cheapens anonymity such that the mods would take the privilege away.

You don't understand slippery slope. You don't "tread on a slippery slope" in one thread any more than you do so with a single act of policy -- it's a cumulative, downward effect that clearly isn't going to happen in one thread. And hey, I even said I don't think it would happen at all, at least not in a major way. I still see the mods' reasons for not wanting the anon feature subject to minor abuse, because then minor abuse becomes the norm, and...

edit:

Well, I'm not exactly shaking in anger or mass pming mods about anonymous feature abuses. I just noted it was annoying in general, which it IMO is.

also this. It's annoying. That's my primary complaint. The justification I provided earlier was meant as more of a policy-side argument.

First, I do grasp the concept of a slippery slope; it's not a particularly difficult concept for people to wrap their minds around. Two, your argument assumes the majority of people would, all else equal, prefer to post anonymously given the opportunity. I don't think this is necessarily true, particularly of TLS or any other community built on internet cred. Finally, this slippery slope argument assumes people are aware of the current state of enforcement and abuse. I'd argue that many TLS users -- perhaps the majority -- barely if at all familiarize themselves with legal employment threads, let alone appreciate the current state of abuse of the anonymous feature.

If, at day's end, you really are just waxing poetic about how much it annoys you, it's ok to say as much. Just don't feed me these bs "slippery slope" arguments.

[ConLawLover]

Hey Chitown,

you sound like an arrogant prick. why ask a question and then correct people when they answer you? god help you.

[dresden doll]

If, at day's end, you really are just waxing poetic about how much it annoys you, it's ok to say as much. Just don't feed me these bs "slippery slope" arguments.

Characterizing this

It isn't. Posters are meant to take advantage of that function only when revealing sensitive employment data. Continuous abuse is really getting old.

as 'waxing poetic' is pretty hyperbolic.

Also, no one needs to convince you, or anyone else for that matter, of the legitimacy of their irritation in order to be free to air it out on TLS.

[clintonius]

Two, your argument assumes the majority of people would, all else equal, prefer to post anonymously given the opportunity. I don't think this is necessarily true, particularly of TLS or any other community built on internet cred.

My argument does not make that assumption. Regarding minor abuse becoming the norm, I was referring to "the norm" in anonymous posting, not in all posting.

Finally, this slippery slope argument assumes people are aware of the current state of enforcement and abuse. I'd argue that many TLS users -- perhaps the majority -- barely if at all familiarize themselves with legal employment threads, let alone appreciate the current state of abuse of the anonymous feature.

Again, it doesn't assume that at all -- you've heard that ignorance of the law is not a defense, right?

I appreciate your point, which seems to be that I'm concocting a reason for my stance that isn't my true motive for that stance, and I've already told you that's correct. But your arguments just don't make any sense.

[edcrane]

Yet another thread derailed by an entirely uninteresting discussion of the anonymous feature.

[bk1]

Yet another thread derailed by an entirely uninteresting discussion of the anonymous feature.

It is quite ironic.

[Anonymous User]

Yet another thread derailed by an entirely uninteresting discussion of the anonymous feature.

It is quite ironic.

No, this is ironic. As in, had edcrane posted anonymously to gripe about a discussion of the anonymous feature, it would be ironic.

[clintonius]

Yet another thread derailed by an entirely uninteresting discussion of the anonymous feature.

It is quite ironic.

A little too ironic?

And yeah I really do think...