We belong to several formal and informal online discussion groups for people in our business, and (other than serving as an opportunity to talk about the latest local AOL miscue), we discuss things that affect us in our new online news medium.
One of the discussions involves anonymous commenting vs. registration. Many news sites either never had or have stopped comments by anonymous or pseudonymous commenters, and are requiring commenters to register with a real name. The rationale behind this is that you get more responsible comments — people can no longer hide behind a screen name to vent, troll, or babble. You have to stand behind what you say.
The negative to that is that sometimes people want to use a screen name to make a responsible comment and not have to feel repercussions, i.e., complain about a neighbor. Having the option of a screen name can make discussion more frank.
We're of two minds on the matter. Some of our best and most reasonable commenters use screen names, and we hate to miss their input if they refuse to register. But there's some appeal in being a grownup and standing behind what you say. On the other hand, ALL of our regularly complaining commenters use screen names — and some people DO hide behind screen names just to attack others.
(Right now, commenters can use a screen name, but we do insist on a real email address so we can ask for clarification or changes if necessary. The email address is not publicized or shared. We've tossed off some commenters for violating this simple rule, and will continue to do so. Word of advice: if you have something inflammatory or insulting to say, you better at least give us a working email address!).
So we're debating whether a change in policy is in order. Changes this big need to go to our readers and community collaborators for input. So let us know what you think — pseudononymously or not!
