This format (anonymous posting allowed, registration permitted) will not allow use of interesting aliases. Therefore, we need to know how important it is to keep the private message function and avatars. This is a one-day poll.
I think I would rather lose the private messaging and gain the aliases. It would be easier to keep up with who's posting. People will forget to sign their posts. (Note that I'm logged in, so it shows my name.)
-- Edited by LVN at 20:38, 2007-04-06
__________________
Love your enemies. It makes them so damned mad. ~P.D. East
I'm not too crazy about the idea -- in past boards that allowed people who make comments from aliases invented for the moment -- shifting identities, our experience has taught us in the past, means people aren't accountable for their comments . . . It almost destroyed discussion . . . but I'm an old fogey . . .
It's a trial run by special request of several folks. If it gets crazy or abused again, it's over. Right now I'm trying to see how to set up some sub-forums which maybe could be password and registration protected.
All 12 of my personalities will continue to log in if that is required. But I could expand to 15 if we go back to aliases. I agree with Stephen on this-- " He is an old fogey".
Patti wrote: I like the PM function. If I want to ask a question of another poster and its none of the boards business, I have the opportunity to do so.
Is it a necessity, not really; is it convienent, definately.
Coastliner wrote: I promise that I will not start a new Bud Ginn thread. I do hear that he is making an effort to become one of Dr. Saunders "informants".
What? Nobody has yet checked for the inevitable link between the Ginns & Dunagins? (Other than the letters g-i-n, of course )
As a relative outsider, I get confused by all the lines of power. What would be Ginn's interest now that Thames is no longer president? I know absolutely nothing about him.