Originally Posted by ragingclue
I don't see what good it does to post Scott's name. I know you're trying to draw parallels to the invasion of privacy, but anonymity on an internet forum is expected unless divulged by the user, while anonymity as President should not be. If Scott has volunteered this information directly elsewhere on this particular forum, then I apologize, but if not, then I think editing the post may be in order.
I TOTALLY agree that anonymity on an internet forum is expected unless intentionally divulged by the user.
Which is why I found it completely disturbing that Scott Wainner posted a message directing people to post comments on a board he owned, without disclosing that he owned that board. And that by signing up to post on his board, members of this board would be giving Scott Wainner their personal information and losing their expected anonymity without even knowing it.
Scott Wainner didn't have any problem at all with violating people's expectation of anonymity and harvesting their personal information on one of his websites he owns. In fact, his response was to denigrate me for warning others that he was in fact the owner of the site he was instructing people to goto, sign up with their personal information, and post.
Given Scott Wainner's obvious disregard for other people's expectation of anonymity, he certainly has signaled that he isn't interested in his own anonymity either.
Since he has already collected sufficient information about me through his deception to personally identify who I am, violating MY expectation of anonymity, I certainly don't feel the slightest bit inclined to edit his name out of any of my posts. Especially since he disclosed his own name by his act of sending people to his own website.