Yes, anonymous duplicate accounts are against the rules unless otherwise sanctioned (e.g. Looking Forward). If you don’t wish to state your point with your identity attached, maybe think carefully about why that is instead of making a burner account.
That’s unfortunate but understandable.
I know I have some topics I’d like advice on, but wouldn’t necessarily want my whole team knowing i was the one asking on help dealing with them, for example.
And secondly, I know some people could worry about social repercussions after making a risky post. CD seems to be getting increasingly toxic in some regards, but I’m also not sure I’ve been arround long enough to make an accurate deduction. It’s something I’ve thought about making a thread about; ironically, I was planning on making a burner for it .
It would be interesting to see if there was an alternative, perhaps you can chose to hide your identity for certain posts, but all mods can still see who? Perhaps there is no need, or no interest, but given the ability in Discourse, that might be a neat alternative
Honestly I think a lot of the source of this toxicity is what people are willing to say when there are no social repercussions for it. Anonymous accounts don’t tend to make places less toxic, after all. See: reddit, 4chan, etc.
Part of it is that when you read somebody else’s post, you don’t get the tone, emphasis and facial expression like you would in a conversation face to face.
That’s nothing new to CD though, or really any online community.
Yes I agree, but it can certainly avoid certain important topics, that should be talked about, from not being brought up. No, they don’t necessarily alleviate toxicity, but that’s not the goal. In my mind the accounts are made because someone has a legitimate, and usually very important topic, that hasn’t been brought up her because no one before them has had the courage.
Just like in life, sometimes people worry about going against social norms in order to address hypocrisy, for example. It doesn’t mean they’re point is less valid (or a necessary discussion) they just worry about people writing them off.
I think the “how I’m treated as a female in FRC” thread is a great example. That comes from what appears to be an alt account, correct me if I’m wrong. I know it’s a topic I certainly wouldn’t feel comfortable posting about, especially if I knew my team was watching and knew that I was referring to them. But I think great discussion has been made from it, that wouldn’t have happened otherwise.
Again, I definitely see the issues with having a bunch of alts running arround and I would do the same things in your shoes, I’m just saying it’s a bummer.
This. I feel alt account are ok up to a point where the account is too toxic or just blatantly obnoxious. If they keep discussion flowing in a gp manner, they should be allowed.
Alt accounts tend to spark controversial discussion, but the actual alt account posts I’ve seen tend to be quite civil. It’s the response to those posts that gets hairy.
I think there are plenty of valid reasons to make an alt account. I would leave the rules the same, but I understand why people break them.
I don’t like burner accounts when they’re used in a “hit and run” style. As in, you get their original post and no follow up (clarification or resolution).
Every account here can have anonymity, to a certain extent. And now other than getting a post hidden, there’s no risk of getting negative repped into oblivion. What are people going to do, not heart your post?
People you know in real life can see your post. My team is large a prevalent on CD, and every thread I make they always find me in school to give me their two cents. I can’t imagine I’m the only one in that regard.
Plus, people being rude and mean is still a real concern, which frankly happens a lot. Sure your not in physical danger, but people can always cyber bully (yes I relize that is not a perfect term but it is sorta fitting).
I think the fact that most of the students in FRC are underage is another area to be concerned about.
Yes. The reason we are all here, young and old, is mutual desire for culture change. We use mentor relationships to effect that change, and competition to hold our interest.
Young people need protection as much as they need mentoring, and those needs create a tension in FIRST programs (as in many other programs designed for younger participants) that requires us to think about what we’re doing all the time. As Woodie would say, that’s good stuff.
Anonymity can be helpful in some situations. As I recall, old-CD once had a feature call FIRST-a-holics Anonymous (FAHA) intended for those.
It won’t stop unless you give people another avenue. Preferably an avenue with a stronger filter/moderation than account creation.
First-aholics Anonymous was a good idea that has been tried several times but seems to lose steam.
For the most part, my mindset when dealing with students isn’t like mature teacher/ immature student, I come into the meetings like it’s a second workplace. So for me the same rules I operate under in my day job apply to my FRC job. There are times you forget that you are talking to kids as young as 14 years old.
And because these are kids, they might not have the experience to know all the ways to deal with a problem and see anonymity as the only option.
Unfortunately in these times of groupthink public shaming, it seems to be hazardous to your health to express a different opinion, which goes against the scientific method. So while I would think that as adults we wouldn’t have to be anonymous, I can see why there are times when that is necessary.
Before asking my question, I want to make it clear that I 100% agree with not allowing anonymous accounts, and am in no way supporting them.
I’ve often heard that it’s against the forum rules to have duplicate accounts, to the point that when I see one it’s one of my first thoughts. But when I went looking for those rules this morning, I couldn’t find anything about that looking through any of the FAQ, TOS, or Privacy Statement. I’m sure it exists somewhere, but can someone point me in the right direction?
I couldn’t find it either, which is actually why I posted this. Good to know it’s not just me.
You can’t find it because the rule isn’t actually about banning anonymous accounts, it’s about banning duplicate accounts. Anonymity is just usually the reason people make duplicate accounts.
There’s no actual requirement that CD users identify themselves, but if you already have an account, you can’t make another to be anonymous. Or for any other reason without prior approval.
I think a system similar to, but less labor intensive than, FAHA would be a good way to handle the sensitive edge cases some are alluding to here. As long as it doesn’t become a soapbox to say something weird and bigoted or whatever.
EDIT: We removed the duplicate accounts rule awhile back, pardon me. Forgot.
I wonder if this would fill the need.
It’s been a while since I’ve seen this, but in the past I know mods have posted anonymously for people that want their message out there but don’t want repercussions to them/their team. Unsure if this is still a policy, but might be at least worth trying to send a mod your anonymous post before making an alt account for it.
It also strengthens your message in that you get the mods on your “side” early, and also gives others a bit more assurance that you’re a real person with a real message and not just a troll.
I feel like the need/desire for burner accounts could be helped by adding two categories to CD:
-
A forced anonymous category could have a lot of value, as long as it was well moderated (lest it become the /b/ of CD). @notmattlythgoe’s discourse plugin looks great to me.
-
A mentors (and alumni?) only category. I know that I’ve had “team culture” type questions that I’ve wanted to ask, but always kept them away from CD as this account is tied closely to my team and I don’t want any students to feel “called out” or self conscious. Not sure how mods would verify someone’s “mentor” status, however.