Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

I can see where you're coming from, but personally, I support the use of throwaways. I can understand someone wanting to contribute to the conversation, but wanting to keep their opinion separate from the rest of their reputation in the robotics community.

I'll give an example. I'm gay. If, say, Karthik were homophobic, that would really suck. I can't support that. However, if Karthik wants to add his (hypothetically homophobic) opinion to a conversation about the representation of LGBT teenagers in FIRST, shouldn't he be able to do so without running the risk of ruining his reputation as a brilliant strategist and analyst? Would CD look at him in the same way if he held such an unpopular opinion?

Using a throwaway allows people (anyone) to contribute to a conversation without putting their reputation on the line. If someone holds an unpopular decision, that could change the way they are perceived forever, and that's not a risk anyone should have to take. Controversial opinions are vital to a healthy discussion of any topic, and throwaways allow people to contribute them.

IMHO.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

I'm not sure how I feel about this hypothetical situation. Before this somehow gets misinterpreted, I would like to state that I am an avid supporter and fighter for LGBT rights and not homophobic. I just don't want someone to mistake your hypothetical for fact. :)

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

The issue is anonomy removes accountability. There are plenty of times I wanted an anon account to post my unpopular opinions. If I did my reputation bar would be all green apposed to Christmas themed. But, if I am going to throw my opinion out there then what's the use if I don't use my real identify.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

The issue here is that generally CD has a very specific socio-political view, of not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings. Is this what Gracious Professionalism is? Is the idea that your personal opinions regarding a matter are negative just because they don't agree with CD's Norm? That is why I use a burner account, I want to voice my opinion, but not have people openly disregarding all of my opinions due to one opinion they disagree with.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

I actually believe it's quite the opposite, people ARE willing to hurt other peoples feelings by replying/negative repping etc. The reason people make burner accounts is so that if their opinion is ridiculed and considered offensive/stupid they have zero repercussions. That or they just blatantly want to say something they know will be considered offensive, so they would rather not have any responsibility for it.

CD has progressively become a more and more hiveminded group of people for many of the popular threads. Lots of people looking for recognition in the community as "best at this" or "knows a lot about that" as the way that some of the pseudo "celebrity" CDers we have are. People want to be the person that writes that oneliner with all the green dots that people make a thread about to try and figure out what that one liner with not the most substance in it actually means. Or make the funny jokes that everyone laughs at. Too many new students/mentors/people are posting just for that reason. Not to actually be helpful and provide constructive praise/criticism/help to a thread. Instead they resort to lame jokes (some jokes on CD are very funny, most are not) pointing out mistakes, blindly promoting their team/region/whatever, and complaining about teams/refs/volunteers/rules/etc without substance/solutions.

But I guess it's just an internet forum, can't expect too much quality.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Not attaching your name to your opinion makes it a meaningless post.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Homophobic opinions aren't treated with such disdain because they are unpopular - the viewpoints expressed actively perpetuate the oppression of LGBT peoples. Freely expressing such viewpoints without anyone challenging them creates an environment that fosters, tolerates, and perpetuates such intolerance.

It's important to not think of these ideas as just "controversial" or "unpopular" opinions when they actively do harm to members of our community and to society in general. This is why such statements are taken so negatively by many. And I would hope people wouldn't view a bigot in the same light as a tolerant and accepting person!

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Perhaps not meaningless as the message could be there, but has little/no credibility as someone who isn't willing to put their name behind their words likely is unsure of their words in the first place.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Well hold on.... don't generalize here. I use a burner account for multiple reasons...

A. I want to keep my team safe from any repercussions of MY actions.
B. I do not want the harassment from others who disagree with what I say. (Both in the World of FIRST and of Chief Delphi) If you want to have an open minded conversation with me that is fine, but calling me bigoted, sexist, etc. is often what results in the sharing of my opinions.
C. Sometimes, I need to discuss things about my team with a larger audience. Issues arise and I have no clue who to deal with them, so I turn to you guys for help. Some of my opinions my team cannot know of because, as I have discussed elsewhere, I will get terminated from the only team within 20 miles of me.

Also, for someone's assured response of - "Just put 'My posts do not reflect the opinions of my team or its affiliates' in your signature". Well, I dont see that as enough.

Also, Post Morphing has become rampant here :yikes:

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Shouldn't someone with such a controversial (or insert stronger word of your choice) opinion have the reputation their opinions deserve?

I mean seriously, otherwise what's the point? Do we all create two accounts, one for posting popular stuff with our name attached so we all look awesome, and a second anonymous one for posting our true opinions? If someone isn't willing to own their opinion, and live by the consequences of expressing that opinion, then they should probably keep that opinion to themselves.

Anonymous accounts do have their place. They are a good, safe way to get advice in a difficult situation without exposing yourself or the situation to the world. They are not a shield to hide behind just because someone wants to post unpopular opinions.

The world has seen people take unpopular stands, own them, and change the culture of entire countries. The opinions weren't popular. Those individuals faced enormous pressure, resistance, and even physical violence to embrace what they believe in. And they changed the world. Without those people making a stand, the US would be a society dependent on slavery where only white male land owners had any say in anything. Heck, the US wouldn't even be it's own separate country.

I have one word for someone who creates/uses an anonymous account to post an unpopular opinion just for the sake of preserving "reputation" - coward.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

This is only one of the many reasons I respect Mr. Stratis. Thank you for your clarity in your posts - all of them!

Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Discussion from another thread/some recent threads, figured I would move it here.

Basically mostly centered around:

Are anonymous accounts okay to use?
Is CD becoming full of non-helpful content?
Solutions to making things better for teams/individuals on CD?


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

A- If you are worried about repercussions on your team it's probably a good indicator that what you are saying is inappropriate.

B- Doesn't having an anonymous account just create more "harrassment"?

C- I can see this being a legitimate use.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Moved burner account discussion to here so we don't further derail the original intent of the thread.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

By post morphing do you mean threads getting off-topic?

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Just to get this out of the way, I was thinking about doing something like this thread myself. Looks like I'm not the only one.

And the one point I'd like to make is that that "legitimate use" for several years had a CD subforum: FAHA (FIRST-A-Holics Anonymous), where some of the moderators would, if someone wanted to make such a post, they could post there and a moderator would "scrub" it (if necessary, to remove identifying info) and post it under their own names. I think it was removed because it was low-traffic, and in preparation for the forum changeup (that hasn't happened yet--Brandon can confirm if he wants to). I'd really like to see that one come back.


The one other thing I'd like to point out is that duplicate accounts are specifically banned by the CD rules that every member of the site agrees to when signing up. So if you have an account and make a burner account on top of that, then you could run into the moderators, and they can find you and call you out by username. I seem to recall a case of Brandon Martus pulling that on someone who was not willing to give their opinions a name and face. (I will note that with permission, some persons and/or groups of persons have duplicate accounts--but in those cases, I'm pretty certain that those persons/groups asked ahead of time and most likely stated why they wanted the duplicate account.)


Just as a thought, and if someone thought it was actually feasible, what if there were a few "forum-bots" who could, if messaged, BE the "anonymous users"? Nah, probably never happen...

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.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

A little off topic, but I agree with this 100%. The worst when someone posts an unpopular opinion and then a 'respected' member posts a meme about "I'm gonna have to get my popcorn ready for this!". It adds nothing to the conversation and just encourages others to bash the unpopular opinion.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Firing shots there, John? :rolleyes:

FWIW, I don't do this with "unpopular" opinions, I do this when I know a Summer CD thread will devolve into stupidity.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...0&postcount=14

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Shoot, I meant to post that with my burner account :)

While I'm not a fan of those posts, that one wasn't a major offender and you still have a very high 'quality post' to 'fluff/joke post' ratio.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

The irony of a thread on anonymous accounts fill with posts from anonymous accounts.

"burner" accounts need to stop. If you can't stand behind what you are saying or doing, hide behind anonymity. It's not professional in the least.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Or you could just be honest while using your name.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I am a big supporter of tying your name to your CD account. I have been posting on CD for 11+ years, and have never had a need to state an opinion that I did not want tied to my name. I view CD as a professional environment, and try to act accordingly.

The first part of the discussion is allowing people to use an anonymous account to state their opinion without tying it to their name. Specifically to the hypothetical in the original post. I agree, a members personal opinions, political, religious, moral, or otherwise, should not effect their standing in the community as an expert in their field of expertise. This is exactly why this opinion should not be brought up in a professional setting. As soon as you bring these unrelated opinions into your professional life you run the risk of people changing their opinions of you.

I have no need to know what Karthik's opinions are on anything non-robot related, and I don't care to know. For the same reasons I don't share mine. I apply the same attitude at work, and in all arenas outside of personal discussions with select people. I would strongly advise that everyone does the same.

For example (since it keeps coming up) if you have strong opinions about the LGBTQ+ community, if they do not directly effect FIRST then you do not need to state them. If they do directly effect FIRST, then you need to be confident enough in your stance to state your opinion, if you aren't then you need to evaluate your opinion. In general, if you aren't willing to have your name tied to an opinion, then you have no business bringing it up in a public setting.

The second part of this, is allowing someone to bring up a difficult or controversial topic without fear of repercussion. I see a need for this, and I would love to see FAHA revived for exactly this purpose, This would allow users to as these types of questions freely without fear of reprisal. At the same time the moderator oversight would insure that the system is used in a professional manner, and is not abused.

The third argument that I have seen is that the issue is with the red and green dots. First, I promise they are really just dots. Second, I have to say, I would much rather see the reputation system eliminated along with anonymous accounts, than see the accounts stick around.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

Consider the message it sends when a well-respected CD member preemptively concludes that a thread will have no merit. Does that encourage other members to take the topic seriously or does it, perhaps, lead others to take it less seriously, ensuring it does, in fact, devolve into stupidity?

Maybe a bit chicken and egg, but I often wonder if nothing said at all is better in those cases.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I do not think anonymous accounts should be used to post "unpopular" opinions or to troll.

I do think there can be a legitimate use case for asking questions or soliciting advice about team dynamics without identifying the team in question.

For example, in some purely hypothetical situations, maybe I'm having trouble with a particular problem student (or mentor, or sponsor, or parent, or...) and I need to ask for advice about how to deal with it. Or maybe my team had a real problem with someone from team XYZ at a recent competition. Or, for a more positive spin, maybe I want to collect ideas for how to celebrate team achievements, such as a really great mentor or student. In these cases I would not necessarily want to post that with my full team attribution, knowing that my teammates are reading.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

When I was starting out on CD and posted a lot of stupid things, I would just PM the big names in FRC and ask for advice. Literally every time they would reply with essays. With them knowing my team, the situation, and the context of the problem, they were able to help more than random shots in the dark like most anonymous threads asking for help end up. Additionally, it creates an unfair bias because the person answering cannot know other sides of the issue. They can't reach out and really help the team itself. Typically, if they know the team number, they can find out more and get to the root causes of an issue.

If people want real advice about their teams, just PM someone. I encourage students and mentors to PM me if you want, but there are much better people who can dish out advice and I've never met one who won't help.

I think the fact that kids and adults here can't vocalize issues with their names attached isn't helping them for when they need to confront people with real issues in real life.

-Akash

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

It's plausible that those in distress are also ignorant of this channel at the outset.

I do believe that moderators control the queue of new threads from new accounts, so those that fall into the center of the Venn Diagram of "CD Mods" and "wise mentors" in theory could keep those threads on ice and handle it in PMs themselves.

That's a hypothetical, however.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

My biggest problem with anonymous accounts is not that they are anonymous (most accounts are anonymous - you get to control what others know about you), it's that they're often used as "hit and run", which in my opinion is a form of trolling. "Hey everyone! Start Discussing This! I'm not going to contribute any further!" or, "Snide, unprofessional comment. Hahaha, you can't do anything to me!"


In the "A(nother) Sad Day For FIRST", the OP posted once and then went dark. They're not posting again, so the entire thread draws attention to something that was not meant to be public FRC knowledge; and there's no accountability or further discussion with the OP (are they apart of the team? how did they become aware of the tweet? do they know what they're posting would be frowned upon if it was true, or outrageous if false?).

There are other popular anonymous accounts (Does anyone know the mystery identity of Looking Forward?), but the crucial difference is that they respond to feedback and are active after the original post.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

This.

I feel mostly the same way, with one exception. That is, if people do feel the need to express their opinion about something (say, an educated guess about the viability of a mechanism), they should be tolerant and respectful. This does not mean one shouldn't outright disagree with something, it just means they have to express their viewpoint respectfully. Said person also shouldn't be worried about hurting another person's feelings (that is not tolerance, that is trying to be politically correct --- which isn't needed in a community where opinions shape how they innovate); as stated earlier in this post, opinions simply need to not condemn/bully a viewpoint. This will lead to better community engagement, I think.

P.S. I hope this isn't ironic because it seems unprofessional; I was trying to be professional.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

There are some specific circumstances that will cause a post from a new account (or an account with few posts) to go directly into moderation. Most posts, however, do not need any approval from mods before showing up on the forums.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I agree with you that in some situations there is a need on CD to allow people to post anonymously. However when I see someone creating a throwaway account and post in several threads and express their opinion, then I have a problem with it. Accounts without team number or name should be restricted to only be able to post in the thread that they started and nowhere else. I don't know if that is technically possible.

I'll provide my opinion on the subject.

I understand if people want to use anonymous accounts to post about issues on their team. Many people in those situations don't want to discredit their teams or face prosecution from the perpetrators of the very issues they want to post about. Let me give an example. Everyone on my team and quite a few members and mentors of other teams know my Chief Delphi username and the team I represent. If my team were having issues and I wanted to seek guidance, I probably wouldn't use this account to post such a thing.

That being said, creating an anonymous account to post "unpopular" or similar opinions is out of line. I feel comfortable with posting any opinion I have using this account. I own what I post, and if others don't agree with what I write that's fine with me.

One of the keys for me is when I post I always try to be respectful and tactful, regardless of if I am providing technical help or providing a counterpoint to a claim made by a previous poster. In short, it's all in how you present yourself.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Maybe it's time to bring back FIRST-A-Holics Anonymous.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I realize that I'm trying to sweep back the ocean, but ...

I think it would be a good idea for people, in general, to stop worrying about the team someone is on when discussing anything, anywhere, unless the explicit topic being discussed is that person's team.

I know that there is a big, deep, and broad pool of sentiment that connects what individuals do to to observers' opinions about the entire team that *happens* to include that individual; but please; teams rarely get to choose their members, and teams with non-trivial membership rolls are going to be full of diverse attitudes about plenty of boring and exciting subjects.

If, in general, we spent more time discouraging a mindset of forming judgments about "teams", instead of "individuals", and invested less mental energy in viewing teams as mono-cultures (or in pushing them to be mono-cultures), I think this thread's topic would lose an important bit of urgency.

Blake

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I think part of the problem is that the people who would come to this board for those purposes of posting anonymously don't know that these tools exist. I don't even know about all the sub-forums and such this site has.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Is this about the other instituationalization thread? If not, disregard this post.

But the guy didn't use a throwaway to hide his opinion from his name. He used a throwaway to prevent the team's image from being hurt. There is a big difference.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I can tell you that, with only a few exceptions (generally, people I know and interact with regularly at events), I have no idea what team anyone is on here on CD, and I rarely look at the team number unless it's specifically relevant to the thread in question (most often if the location in the top right of a post indicates Minnesota and I want to see which event the team is going to or how close they are to me so I can get them appropriate help).

I would actually support "burying" the team number a bit - put it in the individual's profile instead of at the top of every post. That way if I care, I can click on to the profile and find it but it's not right out there for me to are on every post.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Very well said.

However, in life you will always represent your 'team'.

Say for instance I work for Nasa. If I go on a message board with "Nasa engineer" in my bio whatever I do will reflect the company. Or, if I wear my Nasa uniform and rob a bank. Guess what Nasa looks very bad.

The bottom line is your actions usually do not just reflect upon yourself. Its definitely something I struggle with time to time.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I feel like the paper airplane state was directed towards me;) :D

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I think it's less about knowing what team they are from and more about the acc username. And when I see "throwaway" or "anonymous" with a location of "nowhere" posting controversial statements I guess that's when I start to question the content of the post.

It's not like people instantly look at your team number first when they read the content, it of course is the content that they read first. If it is a well thought out post I tend to look at the team that had the insightful commentary just purely as a interesting to know fact. Same for a less than stellar post.

For people who don't want to "protect their team" by not giving their team a bad rep because they post something that may be severely uninformed, and lets be honest actually about this for a second... It's really not that bad when you post controversial things. People do it every day, highly regarded mentors and people that you have never heard of. It's only really bad when you post something colossally incorrect/stupid that people tend to jump on the hating bandwagon (from my point of view). Sure a few people may disagree with you if you say something controversial, but I think the real backlash that people are afraid of is on a much grander scale.

Anyways back to the point. If you are worried about attaching your name to a post, ask yourself if you really should be posting that/is this the right way to express your feelings.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I'm just glad that we have a forum in which anonymity and nastiness is the exception rather than the norm.

As a side note, many of the anonymous posts I've seen have been asking for advice about team dynamics. It is very difficult to give useful advice on such things in this forum, because we are generally only getting only one side of a multifaceted situation. It becomes that much more difficult when there is no context whatsoever, with anonymous postings.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Agreed completely.
I own quite a few forums on the Internet.
I have many...many...troll hunts on those forums.
If it's not me doing the hunting, it's a moderator or software.

I have a policy of not hiding who I am.
It can make me a target.
Team 11 has gotten requests to basically shut me up in the past for topics that they have nothing to do with.
(Needless to say I don't like being a target in FRC but FRC is literally kids stuff compared to some of the stuff I've help shut down outside of FRC where things can actually get dangerous.)

I tell Team 11 what I say here again: if we can't tolerate this diversity we have a problem. On the other side I try not to commit the team's resources; as I often can be out voted on the commitment of those resources.

Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I agree with this to some extent. Although, it is important to recognize that the poster is trying to strike a difficult balance between anonymity and descriptiveness. As I mentioned earlier, the threat of internal repercussions inside the team for posting is very real to the people asking for help. Giving away more details and information, while helpful to us, may strip that person of their anonymity to a reader that is involved in the situation.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Your right of course. My point is that folks shouldn't raise their hopes very high of finding solutions to those types of problems here. I don't know how to fix this, but anonymous accusations that mentor/teacher/parent/school administrator/captain/team member X is destroying the program aren't going to be solved by airing it here, anonymously or otherwise.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

It's a vent. Though I sometimes worry when students engage in this kind of frustration vent that they intend to solve all their personal issues like this.

Some things are better solved without being on the Internet forever.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Thanks for the compliment, but I will respectfully disagree.

No you don't represent them just because you are wearing a shirt. Observers might choose to decide you represent them, but the fact of the matter is that you don't. More broadly, John and Jane Doe aren't authorized to represent the totality (or whatever is the right term) of every organization that they belong to.

If I put on a NASA shirt to rob a bank, am I representing NASA? No, I'm a bank robber who is wearing a NASA shirt.

I'l bet you a vary large amount that if you name an obnoxious, vile, or despicable sentiment, attitude, or behavior; that at least 9 out of 10 times you can find someone employed by NASA who believes or does it. Do they represent NASA, no, unless ..... I decide to let them represent NASA in my own mind.

Again, I realize that I am trying to sweep back the ocean; but it would nice if observers would put more effort into deciding not to let individuals become the representation of groups.

Acknowledging that it does happen is one thing. Saying that it *should* happen is another. Saying that we expect it from each other, and reinforcing and/or rewarding that expectation, is being lazy.

Turning down the "you always represent your team" mantra would lower the impetus to create anonymous accounts in some discussions.

YMMV
Blake

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Speaking as part of team that's had some internal issues in the past, I completely understand the impulse to post anonymously. Put frankly, it would be embarrassing to come out and say, for example, "On team 1124 the mentors have taken over and are doing all the work." And there could certainly be repercussions from the team. In that situation, why would you want to expose yourself by posting under an an account people could use to identify you?

In any case, what would you do with their team number if they revealed it? Objectively speaking, you probably have no real knowledge of your team anyways, and people in those threads are often willing to give you any extra info you need

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I think he same applies to frc though. If I'm a student on 234 and I'm wearing an 1114 shirt, then am I representing 1114 (sorry for using 1114 again :D )? I would say no. It's different if I'm wearing a 234 shirt and am a member of 234, then I am representing my team in my opinion. If I go onto CD and post a lot of stupid things while having 234 as my avatar, team number, and in my signature, then people will wonder why I'm even on my team. People would probably wonder what we've been learning at robotics from our mentors about the real world and professional environment.

Now how I act isn't a direct representation of what I learn at robotics because I can decide what to listen to and what not to listen to but the impact I have on my team's image would still get some negative feedback. In the fall, we did many presentations of what you could do in the robotics world. I was in charge of the Chief Delphi presentation. The users of Chief Delphi on my team all agreed that even having the disclaimer that says your opinions don't represent your team doesn't actually work. What you say with your team number attached still affects the opinions of others about your team.

My hypothetical is this:
In my opinion, I really love 1114 and I think a lot of that reason is because I think Karthik is awesome. With that said, if a lot of 1114 members were on here trolling and posting unjustified opinions, then my opinion of 1114 would definitely go down and I'd start to question what happens on 1114 (This is not what happens on 1114! This is just an analogy).

Do you understand what I'm saying or do you disagree with this. If you disagree, feel free to say it. CD has always been about professional discussion and constructive criticism so I'm not afraid to hear you opinion. Thanks. :)

-Logan

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Actually I would go out on a limb and say by wearing a tshirt you are representing their team. Here is an example.

I have a 254 sweatshirt. On my last day in St.Louis my mom and I went up in the arch. It was on the chillier side so I wore the sweatshirt. As soon as I walked out of my room it was noticed. All of the people around me thought I was a member of 254. Just in the hotel I had 3 people come up to me. Some saying how cool "my" robot was or asking questions about it. I throughout that day got very good at saying that I was not a member of the poofs but it was pretty funny. In the end through a day in STL I had around 10 people come up to me. If I behaved badly, did something stupid, or was rude to the people coming up to me many would assume I was a member of 254 and gain a bad opinion of them.

So be careful who you trade those tshirts too ;)

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Never really thought about that. That actually makes a lot of sense though. I feel like if someone wore an 1114 shirt at an IN competition, people would probably know they aren't on 1114. But at worlds, anyone could be from anywhere.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I agree. If you wear another team's t-shirt you are representing their team, so I also urge other folks to keep in mind what they say even when they aren't wearing their own team t-shirt during competitions, but another team's t-shirt.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

That is quite true--many times people assume that the person inside a team shirt happens to be on the team in question. (They could be a parent or a younger sibling, but they could also be someone you traded a shirt to.)

Myself, I mentor a team near the team I was on in high school. I happen to hang out in the general area of a bunch of folks who know I was on the team--but they tend to assume that I am on the high school team, not my current team. Both did well at Champs, and folks want to congratulate me--I generally ask "which one?" and clarify that while I was on the team there, I now mentor another team. (And then one of the team parents was seen wearing a different team's shirt... those that knew simply went "oh, looks like someone traded shirts".)

It's not that you ARE affiliated with an organization. It's that you LOOK LIKE you are--often, that's one of the things that can drive that sort of association. I tend to be a little careful what shirts I wear when I'm going out in public, for that specific reason.

And BTW, there was an incident on CD quite a few years ago where someone took on a team number, made one of the "usual" accusations against one of the "usual targets", and one of the mentors for the team whose number he picked up very forcefully stated that that person was not part of the team--and if they were, there would be a reckoning (implied, not stated, that part). Reputation is tough to build, easy to destroy.



I don't have a problem with anonymous accounts, per se. I recognize that there are good reasons for anonymity, and maybe later they can update to not be anonymous. But if you're going to anonymously troll at someone, let's just say that I prefer to see who I'm about to debate (and I do prefer to try to attack the "arguments" presented, not try to attack the person).

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I understand why people want to use burner accounts. I get it, you want to voice an opinion, and your scared that it'll affect you in the long term.

But in my opinion, I believe that you need to state your opinion as you, not as someone else. If someone wants to find out what I'm like, I want them to be able to go through my posts and figure out what I agree on and what I don't. I don't want to be a person that has all posts that are "politicaly correct" that agree with everything CD says... that's not who I am.

And regarding bad rep, I don't care (much) if I get a few red dots because of an opinon, I want people to know it is mine, and if anyone else has that opinion and want to talk about it, I want to be open to talk about it.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't me saying that you can just put people down with negative remarks. (You can't do that with your real or burner accounts), but as long as its a constructive criticism, its perfectly okay. If you are scared of saying something on your real account (like cursing out a mentor on how stupid they are) (random example), than it doesn't need to be said on a burner account either.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I saw this thread title and the first couple posts before I left for work this morning, and I ended up stewing on it during my commute and for good bits of an all day meeting. As a result I have some points that I really want to hit that I now see have already been broached by previous posters (and in many cases, better described by these previous voices). My apologies for duplicating some discussion points, as well as what is likely to be quite a long post in general.



TL;DR - I think most concur that "burner" accounts have gone out of control, and should be reigned in. However, not all anonymous accounts are the same, and we need to understand why they have become more prevalent before anything can be done to address the root causes.



Hiding your identity or team association when posting on Chief Delphi is not an entirely new phenomena, but it certainly seems to have become more frequent in recent years (and perhaps increasingly so in the past few months). There were cases of this dating back quite a while in Chief Delphi history, and some involvement in some of Chief Delphi's most notorious (and sometimes entirely deleted) threads. So why is it more common now? I don't know if there's a single answer to that question, but I'm willing to pose a few hypotheses as to reasons why.

For one, the moderation's approach to anonymous duplicate* accounts seems to have changed. I remember at least one instance where an "anonymous" poster that was criticizing the build philosophy of three notable teams had their posts applied to their "main" account by Chief Delphi administrators. I know one moderator stated on one of the FRC-community webstreams that more people apparently hide their IP behind proxies than they used to, so perhaps this is a reason for the change in moderation philosophy. I also know of quite a few other notorious anonymous threads/posts that seem to have been deleted, with very few examples (that I can find) of these threads from further in the past still existing. I know some of these still get deleted in 2016, but subjectively it at least seems like more survive than they used to.

*It's worth noting that there's no rule against anonymous accounts, but rather a rule against duplicate accounts

Secondly, there are far more "pseudonym" accounts than there used to be. Until 2008, it was basically just Car Nack. When Looking Forward started, there was some contention about the legitimacy of that account, but Brandon put out notice that it was pre-approved by administrators. Now, there's a slew of accounts dedicated to predictions for different regions. While this motivation for anonymity is largely different than the "burner" accounts, it may be setting a precedent to newer posters that anonymous accounts are part of the Chief Delphi culture. Even more troublesome than the prediction accounts may be the seemingly tolerated/semi-celebrated "troll" accounts like WestCoastBestCoast and RivetMan (funny as they may be).

Third, the internet as a whole has changed a lot in the past decade. When many of the seasoned FRC veterans first created Chief Delphi accounts, social media was a vastly different entity than it is today. Generation Z is growing up in a world where Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, etc. are a part of their default social interactions. Virtually all of them already have outlets where they can share their opinions with accounts tied to their real world identity. Further still, even their FRC teams have accounts on many of these platforms, reducing the need for Chief Delphi to be a central FRC hub for sharing team news, robot photos, reveal videos, congratulations, etc. What uses do these students then have for Chief Delphi? Aside of specific technical discussions, it's easy to see where anonymity may be valued in the remaining FIRST-specific cultural and ethical discussions that occur on CD. In a social media-driven world, forums and message boards' anachronisms are often valued simply for the potential anonymity they afford.




Beyond just the question of why these posts are more frequent, there's a wide variety of reasons these posts happen in the first place. Like I said earlier, there are the pseudonym prediction accounts and troll persona accounts. And as other people mentioned, it's one thing to create a "burner" to seek advice about internal team issues when you wish not to call direct attention to your team over these potential dysfunctions. We used to have FAHA for these types of posts. While there may be biases with these posts, anonymity is pretty much a necessity for helping these posters work towards a resolution when they don't know of other avenues to turn. Similarly, there are those who are afraid of consequences to their team (or possibly themselves) for taking an unpopular stand on FIRST culture-related issues. In some cases, this can be understandable, as legitimate disagreement with the "Chief Delphi hivemind" can be somewhat intimidating. In other cases, it's rather disgusting as posters try to hide behind anonymity to take pot shots at other posters or teams. Then there are those who use anonymous accounts to shield themselves (or their teams) from taking unpopular stances on general societal or other issues. This is where "Political Correctness" (or as I refer to it "Not Being a Jerk") gets dragged up, and conversations can get mired in lengthy debates.

Given the different avenues of why a poster may chose to create a "burner" account, we as a group can try to address as many root causes as possible. In some cases, it may involve moderators changing how these accounts are handled. In others, we have the power to set the culture ourselves. In the most obvious sense, you see plenty of these burners accounts loaded with red dots. That form of dissuasion may or may not work. But we can also strive to create a climate in which people are less driven to create these accounts in the first place. Namely, Chief Delphi can attempt to be a community in which diverse opinions are given more room to breathe, even if the majority of individuals disagree with them. That doesn't mean that opinions go unchallenged (particularly those that are hurtful or oppressive), but rather than people are more willing to engage in honest discussion rather than snark, shutdown posts, or over-the-top rhetoric. We can realize that sometimes the Chief Delphi groupthink can be rather intimidating, and that many lurkers and new posters end up discouraged when the collective slams down on them immediately. We can realize that there are large groups of the FRC community that aren't active posters on Chief Delphi, and both that they may have valid opinions that differ from the CD consensus and that they may read our words without typing a response. We can realize that there are plenty of those who read CD but are discouraged to post because of the type of atmosphere created towards those who disagree with the collective or the most revered posters. While these consensus may have been reached for entirely beneficial reasons, we can work towards trying to be more inclusive of those who may not (initially) agree. Hopefully then, people won't feel as much need to shield their teams from their words.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Folks

My point earlier was emphasizing the difference between being a member of, or affiliated with, an organization, and being the authorized voice of an organization.

No one needs to educate me about the logic behind a team wanting every member to always be on their best behavior. That's obvious.

What I am recommending is that we, as observers, don't over-emphasize it.

If there is little room for well-founded disagreement, protest, or boat-rocking in our mental image of what a good team's members should do/be, then I think we make a mistake.

When someone wants to (or does) express something controversial, worrying about team image should take a back seat to worrying about the strength of the argument. If the argument is strong/sound the person advancing it should feel confident that their team image will be enhanced, not harmed.

I hope that ethos permeates all of STEM robotics activities outside of CD, and CD. Except in situations where entire team populations are explicitly supposed to be judged, let's stop nagging people about their individual actions reflecting badly on their team. Let's choose to judge teams by the actions of the members authorized to represent the whole team, and let's judge individuals as individuals.

Doing this should reduce the number of anonymous accounts a little bit. Maybe a lot.

Still sweeping back the ocean,
Blake

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

This just makes me want to scream, "No! No! No!", in the most gracious and professional manner I can muster.

But I won't. :)

I understand that this is conventional wisdom, and that it is often repeated by many as if it were a fundamental law of the universe, like F = MA, but ... let me ask, "What makes it true?".

If you said many people might mistakenly decide that you, or any other individual in a team shirt, are always an authorized representive of an entire team; and that those people need to be reminded to avoid making that mistake, I would agree.

But a claim that you (or any random member of the team) actually represent an entire team, or other organization, simply because you have one of their old shirts on ... Nope, I don't buy it.

Can someone convince me?

Blake

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I can't convince you--I think the first part of the quoted section sums it up.

You are not representing that team--but you are perceived as representing that team. The difference between perception and reality can be rather fine, in some people's minds. Just as an example, it is entirely possible for a ref crew to be thoroughly unbiased (as a crew), but be seen as biased for or against a team or two because X happens and Y happens--they're completely independent events, but it happens in such a way that the refs appear biased.

"I think, therefore I am", when applied to others, becomes "I think you are, therefore you are". That's... unfortunate, in some cases. Not so unfortunate in others. (And... in some special cases, it actually becomes the truth. But that's a whole 'nother discussion.)

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

A lot of the difficulty is being an LRI or a head ref is managing the perception of impartiality. I know I can be impartial when inspecting robots, but it can be difficult to walk up to a team I know well and not have an outside observer say "well, he's friends with that team, so...". It's not that big of a deal for me most of the time, but when a question comes up in the playoffs, it can be tough. It's one of the big reasons I'm careful about who I ask to help me during the playoffs - having inspectors keeping an eye on the queue from different teams or from teams that aren't playing that afternoon can really help!

The short of it is, perception is just as important in these situations as reality. If someone has reason to perceive you have an affiliation with a group, then you are representing that group whether you (or the group) likes it or not.

Re: Hugs vs hand shakes at opening ceremony
 

I would argue that people should be truthful about who they are and what they believe if they want to contribute to the conversation here. If a person has a belief that they do not want tied to their reputation then they should not bring it up. Forum accounts like the tones here provide a community through accountability, and there are plenty of other sites where anonymity is the norm.

Now, if someone wants to ask for advice anonymously, in order to protect identities, I think that is perfectly fine. Asking for advice doesn't always need to be tied to a person/reputation.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I've thought about this a little bit, and my conclusion is this:
-Using a burner account in order to ask for advice is fine. Certainly, there are times when we all need to ask advice, but don't need it to be tied down to someone specifically. This especially is ok, since it is possible that someone else later may need this same advice, and can use this thread/post for help.

-However, using a burner account to share an opinion is less okay. Opinions are what make a person unique. Sticking to those opinions and defending them is what makes that person whole. Throwing out an opinion without tying it down to someone is a poor way to go about, as not sticking to your opinion may show how little you are willing to defend it. Granted, I've used words like "may" and "less okay" to say that there are some times when it is absolutely necessary for this to happen.

Either way, I stick to my one account in order to defend all my opinions so other people can get a better picture of what I'm like.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Sensitive, team dynamic/relationship advice. If you're asking what gear ratio to use the question better not be anonymous.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

OK. I will be the one to play the GP card.

If you think you need a duplicate account to express an opinion, then you know that that post should not be made.

The community cannot have it both ways. Either drop the restriction or give the users an outlet like FAHA. I would be more than happy to help moderate it.

If you don't like what you are reading on CD you have three choices:

• Keep reading and ignore the noise
• Block users you disagree with
• Don't read CD

It's important to keep this community going. I want to grow participation, not drive members away.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

Of course. Cluttering up CD with too many anon accounts for unnecessary things is completely wrong. I wrote this thinking about what people typically use burner accounts for. :)

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

I wouldn't have as much of a problem with the "institutionalized/toxicity" post if it were actually asking for advice. But go back and read it, trying to find where the author does that.

Advice is definitely not what it is looking for. It's just an ex-mentor vaguely accusing an unnamed team's mentors of having ulterior motives, and accusing the team in general of nepotism and toadyism. The anonymous coward who wrote the post isn't even part of the team being accused.

The person posting claims to have been part of multiple teams that have had the same trouble, extrapolates that to "every team" based on "personal experience", and denigrates FRC in general because of it. That's a hint that the problem is with the person complaining, not with any of the teams. And because no identity is attached to anything being said, there is no background against which to assess the claims, and none of it is credible. Everyone trying to answer the post with advice seems to be missing its parting message of "Every FRC team is broken. Discuss."

It seems clear to me that the goal of starting the thread was merely to anonymously stir things up, not to try to find a way to fix anything. And that is what I have a problem with.

Re: Anonymous/Burner Accounts and CD Etiquette
 

There is another possibility. You might be motivated to use an Anon account because you have a strong suspicion (accurate?) that many readers will fail to treat what you write as the opinion of a single individual being expressed for only their own purposes.

It's not a "binary" situation. There are multiple dimensions/motivations.