Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I don’t think that is always true, but it is a definitely a good indicator if what you are saying is not appropriate.

Despite what people say: “My views do not reflect those of my team” people use the material they are fed, to create an image of a particular team. If you have an opinion which is different to other peoples, for example about Paper Airplane throwing ( pretty minor in the scheme of things, but people still have different opinions on it) or especially issues such as LGBT+ in FIRST you are entitled to say it and isn’t inappropriate, but these opinions still form how people view your team.

The most important thing about giving your opinion is how you do it, it is alright to voice your opinion as long as you are respectful of other people and their views and give reasoning for your opinion. If someone else questions why you think that reply respectfully or PM them ( still being respectful) to stop a thread becoming an argument. If you’re not capable of expressing your views, respectfully and nicely don’t.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I merged a ton of posts into this thread from here: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...hreadid=148467

That's why some things may seem slightly out of place.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

In my mind, this is one of the key tenants of Gracious Professionalism. It's not the opinion itself, it's how it's expressed. Remember that every word, every sentence typed or spoken has its own context, and communicating that context to avoid misunderstandings is the way to communicate professionally.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I think the issue here is the dots and people giving negative rep for the wrong reasons... We're all told "they're just dots" but how many of us actually believe that? How many of you would be ok with a bunch of red dots.

I find it far too often that people post a differing opinion and get negative rep for it. That's not what the rep system is necessarily for. A differing opinion is not "wrong" persay and not necessarily deserving negative rep. I don't think people understand the purpose of the dot system. Why would someone who has a different view deserve negative rep.

This happens far too often and people are concerned of getting negative rep for posting a unpopular opinion and that's why I think people have throwaways.

Tl;dr the dot system/improper use of it causes people to feel the need for throwaways

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

As a future forum perk, is there a way this disclaimer could be placed at the front of the thread? I've had a post of mine split off into a separate thread before, and it was a bit odd that I had appeared to start a discussion that I didn't intend to.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I think the answer is no, but I'll poke around and see what I can find.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

This. This is it.

If anyone has used Quora, (a question and answers site) it has a feature where you can ask a question anonymously. As a result, people are able to ask very private and personal questions, and also intriguing subjects with full anonymity. Anonymous accounts should be used for the same purpose and nothing more.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

If the anonymous poster is making a claim that they expect us to believe (254 is retiring, 1114's students don't even touch the robot, etc.), then yes, the post is meaningless because it lacks credibility. But I can't see any reason someone would request advice about a falsified team situation. At one time, team situations were posted anonymously in the FAHA forum, which was nice.

As for outrageous, anonymous opinions, we would all do well to ignore them because most of them seem to be trolls. Interacting with all of them for the few that aren't trolls just isn't worth it.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I try to teach students (and definitely have taught my children) that you can disagree with people, even strongly, without being a jerk. I don't have a problem per se with people creating anonymous accounts. For some things, like the occasional desperate post about a team with existential troubles, it is appropriate to not have the team identified. But in general I think if you are posting something where you are worried about getting a lot of negative feedback, ask yourself if you really believe what you are posting? If you do then you should be able to frame your post in a respectful, even graciously professional, way.

If you are creating an anonymous account because you don't care to take the time to do this, or because the opinion you want to express can't be framed respectfully, then maybe you should think about why you are posting. Way too many people are comfortable acting online in a way that they would never dream of behaving in real life. And way too many people derisively decry "political correctness" in situations where they really mean "polite" or "respectful." Way too many people also seem to think that freedom of expression should mean freedom from criticism and freedom from consequences.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

At one point in CD history there was a forum that you could put questions into and one of the CD moderators would take it, clean up the post a little and the post it out under their name. It gave people a chance to post hard questions in a safe manner.

It was removed because it wasn't used. Maybe it's worth bringing it back for times like this.

I try not to get caught up in the political issues around FIRST(*). If I have good advice that may help because it worked for me, I'll PM it. Sometimes I'll post to add some reinforcement to another persons post. I do put my name on them. To some extent I feel for the well respected mentors that others try to drag in. (Hey what would Foster do?) I don't know, if they haven't posted yet then what they would do is keep their fingers silent.

I too have a collection of red/green dots, but after almost 10 years, they are mostly green. (Although just I collected a red one because I was promoting VEX in an all FIRST forum:rolleyes: ). The dots don't really matter.

But the longer tail of saying something that has bad implications on your team is an issue. So I'm good with a "burner account" on "My team is imploding due to ..." to get some ideas on how to help. I'm also good with a burner on " I'm a mentor on a team that is having this same problem, here are things we are trying". Remember, posts here don't go away, CD is well searched by Google, so posting things that may hurt your team isn't a good idea.

Not so much of a burner fan for things that are not part of the core robotics. And in grey areas "I'm a roboteer on a team that doesn't know I'm LGBTQ", burner is OK. "LGBTQ people shouldn't do robotics", no burner for them, that is not helpful in any way.

Thanks Madison for pulling all this together to make it a unified thread.

And just a side note, there are only about 10% of the "names" that are names, not pseudonyms.

Thanks,
Foster
(*) vs politics in general. I've seen so many boards go down in flames with the introduction of the current political environment. Thank all of you for keeping the focus here 100% on the robot.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I firmly believe that CD should foster the kind of environment where people only need anonymous/burner accounts to discuss highly personal issues... not to discuss the hot topics of CD and our culture. I posted this back in the hugs & handshakes thread:

Part of enabling people to do 1 (to 'own' their opinion) is to not jump all over someone for posting differing views. Challenge or debate them, but keep the discussion respectful and full of GP. For me, Gracious Professionalism is FIRST's/Woodie's twist on Bible verses like:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consider this me challenging this viewpoint to avoid perpetuating a narrow view. I agree and disagree... I'm guessing you're not surprised though, Chris. :-)

I'm all for people being able to share and post viewpoints... and for people being able to challenge them. My problem comes when "challenging viewpoints" ends up equating to a group of people demeaning and insulting a person. This happens a lot on the internet and in large groups of people. It happens to both sides on various hot topics of the day, depending largely on which side is the norm in that social context. This "group shaming" happens less on CD than other areas of the internet, but it still happens too much here.

What is interesting to me here, is that you're both rallying around being "tolerant and accepting," while in the same breath saying that certain ideas and views should not be tolerated. In some ways I agree... I believe that there is a difference between being controversial (an idea that is simply unpopular to the group) and being wrong (an idea that is objectively wrong)... but both groups of people should be treated the same way... with respect and graciousness. In my mind, a terse one-liner is most often demeaning and less often respectful and gracious.

I'd also like to underline and point out a couple other things "on the side." First, I don't like that it seems now that anyone who doesn't hop on the LGBT train with both feet and advocate for them on all issues seems to be tossed into the category of being a homophobic bigot. I disagree with a number of the issues that have been popular for LGBT people, BUT I don't think they're any less human. They're still real people that have real struggles and face real oppression from true bigots and bullies. Pretending that there are two categories (LGBT-Advocates and Homophobic Bigots) is really quite short-sighted.

Going a step further, I'd say that not only is categorizing anyone not firmly behind LGBT issues short-sighted, but it's also actually enforcing oppression of people with different moral views. It can make people with different moral views feel inhuman or stupid (perhaps because those specific or similar words are often used!). By your argument, it seems that it would also be right for individuals that label people as "homophobic" or "bigot" to be challenged for fostering, tolerating and pertuating intolerance.

My view? Everyone should be treated with the utmost respect and grace. This means really hearing other people, really considering their views, and really trying to stop bullies to keep everyone safe. It doesn't mean that no one will feel insulted... there are other opinions all over the world, and people need to learn how to deal with that. Trying to create an environment where no one needs to deal with anything that might be negative about them doesn't help. It's exactly the same as the "everybody's a winner" mentality not promoting individuals and teams to challenge themselves and improve capabilities.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I am struggling to understand how all this translates into the "Non-Chief Delphi" world. If you don't want accountability, how do you express your opinions? Do you sit in meetings and not contribute?

If you have a different opinion or can correct misinformation, why not just do it?

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Well put. We should all strive to learn how to express our opinions well. And to understand that just because you express your opinion well doesn't mean others will not or should not criticize it.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

No it makes it an honest post because you don't have to worry about how you may be percieved and thus you don't have to water down our opinion. If you're on some random team and aren't well known which describes me and the overwhelming majority of people on CD using a main account vs a throwaway holds equal weight. It's only for people like Karthik or Corsetto where using a throwaway significantly reduces the impact.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Agreed entirely. I'm going to quote what one of my mentor says a lot. He says this in terms of manufacturing but it can be applied here too. He says "Would you put your name on that?" If not, then it needs to be modified for you to put your name on it or scrapped all together. That applies to CD posting as well.