Personal/Private Journals

[Quagmire]

I brought this idea up in the staff forums a few months ago, but it never got off the ground. Now I'm curious to see what the members think.

I've been thinking about how it might be helpful for members to have a place where they can journal anonymously

Another forum I was on had something called "Personal Forums" (think that's what it was called) where the hosting member could limit participation to people who they invited. The forums and their content would be invisible to everyone else.

The prospect of creating something like this the usual way (with add-ons and what not) is out of the question here, at least for the foreseeable future, so I have an alternative to suggest: what if we start allowing members to create an additional, anonymous account but restrict use of that account to one thread in Journals?

Here's what I'm talking about:

Say you feel the need to journal about a few personal issues, but would rather not have everyone in the forums know and/or be able to comment about your personal business.

The way this would work would be that you would contact staff to request an additional, anonymous account to be used exclusively in one thread that you would create in the Journals forum.

This thread would be open for posting by invitation only, exclusive to people who you would invite to participate.

Possible rules c/would be:

--- sock account can only be used in Journals, and only in one allowed thread.

--- only people on your "Approved list" can post in your thread. Posts by all other members would be deleted by request of OP without any further action except in cases where it becomes chronic and is obviously intentional.

--- no tagging other members unless they're on your approved list

--- all journal socks would need to have "Anonymous Journal Sock-puppet" in their user title.

--- all other forum rules apply

Thoughts?
Questions?

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I think that's a good idea, and I would participate if it was an option.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Thoughts?
Questions?

It sounds good in theory, however I'd say no to the idea as it stands (but with an open mind to the subject still). On other websites, I've seen the implementation of anonymous journals (of sorts), and though not exactly like this idea, they're prone to being shut down because people are prone at interpreting anonymous as rule-free, and the feature on these other sites attracts some of the wrong people, as well. Perhaps if I had some reassurance that such a feature would be implemented in a way where this wouldn't be an issue, I would be on board.

Also, if people can invite whom they want, they might accidentally "out" their identity just by inviting their friends. Even writing styles can sometimes "out" identity.

That being said, I think within the broader idea, there are still some good elements. So I'm not sure I'd actually suggest abandoning thought and conversation regarding the idea completely.

 

[Quagmire]

It sounds good in theory, however I'd say no to the idea as it stands (but with an open mind to the subject still). On other websites, I've seen the implementation of anonymous journals (of sorts), and though not exactly like this idea, they're prone to being shut down because people are prone at interpreting anonymous as rule-free,

I covered that in the op.

and the feature on these other sites attracts some of the wrong people, as well.

I don't understand how you think that could happen. What do you mean by the wrong people? I mean how is that going to happen if it's invitational only?

Perhaps if I had some reassurance that such a feature would be implemented in a way where this wouldn't be an issue, I would be on board.

Also, if people can invite whom they want, they might accidentally "out" their identity just by inviting their friends. Even writing styles can sometimes "out" identity.

Yes, it's not fool-proof. Other forum members might be able to figure out who you are if, for whatever reason, they decided to put the effort into it (?).

But for me personally, it isn't the other members I would be trying to hide my identity from, and I know of at least a few other people on this board who would have similar concerns.

That being said, I think within the broader idea, there are still some good elements. So I'm not sure I'd actually suggest abandoning thought and conversation regarding the idea completely.

No offense, but I don't think you understand the idea completely.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I don't understand how you think that could happen. What do you mean by the wrong people? I mean how is that going to happen if it's invitational only?

I'm talking about it attracting the wrong people who want anonymous accounts, not about the people joining the conversation.

To put it more specifically, I once helped manage a Discord server which had an anonymous journal set up as part of a channel. Even though all rules were in play, people kept going to it and posting horrible things they wouldn't say if the concept wasn't of being anonymous to the public. 40% of the entries were things that would break the rules of the Discord server.

No offense, but I don't think you understand the idea completely.

There's the possibility I may not.

 

[Quagmire]

I'm talking about it attracting the wrong people who want anonymous accounts, not about the people joining the conversation.

Again: the wrong people as in who? It's not like people would be creating their own accounts, they would have to request one from the staff.

To put it more specifically, I once helped manage a Discord server which had an anonymous journal set up as part of a channel. Even though all rules were in play, people kept going to it and posting horrible things they wouldn't say if the concept wasn't of being anonymous to the public. 40% of the entries were things that would break the rules of the Discord server.

And?

There's the possibility I may not.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Again: the wrong people as in who? It's not like people would be creating their own accounts, they would have to request one from the staff.

I know that.

And?

There's not much more I really have to say.

 

[Quagmire]

I know that.




There's not much more I really have to say.

Sorry but I just don't understand your concerns.

I mean, I can't think of too many forum members who would just suddenly go ape **** and start trolling because they have an another account (I can think of one or two), and even if they did, they would just be trolling their own thread.

And even if that happened there's this group of people called 'staff' whose job it is to take care of stuff like that.

 

[JustGeorge]

You already know I'm a big fan of the idea.

While I'm willing to bet there are a few(maybe more than a few) members who would identify my writing, I'm more concerned about being identified by people I know in real life, and its caused me to hold more than a few things back.

I think the potential anonymity could be relieving for some.

 

[dybmh]

The poll asks if i would be interested in it.

I would read the threads, at least check them out. But I cannot imagine ever using the feature myself.

 

[dybmh]

the wrong people as in who?

Trolls? People who make stuff up. Or just type inflammatory stuff that they don't actually believe. I suppose it's not much different than a conventional user who shows up wanting to do that sort of stuff. But, the way I read @Snow White's message, it's that the anom-journals area attracts people who want to do that sort of stuff more than just a conventional forum user account.

Maybe there's ways to filter those people a tiny bit. Restrict it by post count? Require users to have 250 posts first? Or be here for 3 months? Maybe that would cut down on the temptation for drive-by provocateurs?

 

[Quagmire]

Trolls? People who make stuff up. Or just type inflammatory stuff that they don't actually believe.

Dybmh, Could you do me a favor and go back and read the op again?

That should clear most of this up for you.

I suppose it's not much different than a conventional user who shows up wanting to do that sort of stuff. But, the way I read @Snow White's message, it's that the anom-journals area attracts people who want to do that sort of stuff more than just a conventional forum user account.

What @Snow White's talking about and what I'm proposing are two completely different things.

Maybe there's ways to filter those people a tiny bit. Restrict it by post count? Require users to have 250 posts first? Or be here for 3 months? Maybe that would cut down on the temptation for drive-by provocateurs?

Yes there would be requirements (and I should have put that in the op).

What I have in mind would be a feature that's only open to establish members, people we know.

As far as trolling goes, I'll repeat what I said to someone in private: I can't see anyone inviting other people to participate in their private journal and then acting like a dink. The people you invite will know who you are and are most likely going to be the people whose opinions matter most to you.

 

[dybmh]

Dybmh, Could you do me a favor and go back and read the op again?

I just re-read it, and I didn't see anything which addresses someone coming here intentionally to troll or to be provocative.

What @Snow White's talking about and what I'm proposing are two completely different things.

It's an anom-journal area.

Yes there would be requirements (and I should have put that in the op).

What I have in mind would be a feature that's only open to establish members, people we know.

OK.

As far as trolling goes, I'll repeat what I said to someone in private: I can't see anyone inviting other people to participate in their private journal and then acting like a dink. The people you invite will know who you are and are most likely going to be the people whose opinions matter most to you.

Ohhhh. I'm not talking about that. The individual I'm talking about isn't inviting anyone. They're just journalling and posting provocative garbage that is not technically against the rules. The question is, does the anom-journal area attract people who are interested in doing that more than conventional membership.

But as I said, there's not much stopping a person joining and doing that using a conventional account.

 

[Quagmire]

I just re-read it, and I didn't see anything which addresses someone coming here intentionally to troll or to be provocative.

Again: why would somebody invite a group of people to their journal and then act like a jerk?

It's an anom-journal area.

Yes they share a word, that doesn't mean they're the same thing.

What @Snow White is talking about is a feature where you send a post to a bot and it posts it completely anonymously, nobody in the forum knows whos post it is.

What I'm talking about is having one journal thread open to you and your friends and that's it. Everybody participating would know who everybody else is, it wouldn't be anonymous in that sense.

OK.



Ohhhh. I'm not talking about that. The individual I'm talking about isn't inviting anyone. They're just journalling and posting provocative garbage that is not technically against the rules.

If somebody turns their journal into a hate-blog or whatever, it would be the easiest thing in the world to get them to stop doing it. All we'd have to do is revoke the privilege.

The question is, does the anom-journal area attract people who are interested in doing that more than conventional membership.

Only one way to find out.

But as I said, there's not much stopping a person joining and doing that using a conventional account.

Sorry, not sure what you're saying here.

 

[Quagmire]

Also, since people will have to go through staff in order to gain access to an anonymous account, the staff will know who the account belongs to.

 

[dybmh]

Again: why would somebody invite a group of people to their journal and then act like a jerk?

Hopefully this was clearer after you read the end of my reply? The individual is not inviting anyone.

Yes they share a word, that doesn't mean they're the same thing.

Am I misunderstanding the meaning of that word? It means that they can post things without the general users here from knowing who it is.

What @Snow White is talking about is a feature where you send a post to a bot and it posts it completely anonymously, nobody in the forum knows whos post it is.

"On other websites, I've seen the implementation of anonymous journals (of sorts), and though not exactly like this idea, they're prone to being shut down because people are prone at interpreting anonymous as rule-free, and the feature on these other sites attracts some of the wrong people, as well."

What I'm talking about is having one journal thread open to you and your friends and that's it. Everybody participating would know who everybody else is, it wouldn't be anonymous in that sense.

If the I request an anom-journal and invite no one, then only the staff knows and no one else.

If somebody turns their journal into a hate-blog or whatever, it would be the easiest thing in the world to get them to stop doing it. All we'd have to do is revoke the privilege.

I'm not staff, I don't know how you would police it and determine if it turns into something that is inappropriate. I think it would be difficult to make those sorts of judgements. But I'm not you. Yes, I am 100% confident that revoking the priviledge is easy and simple.

Only one way to find out.

Yes.

Sorry, not sure what you're saying here.

Any person ( not a current member ) could join, no one knows who they are, go to the journal area, and troll all they want ( until they get kicked out ). It's basically the same thing as having an anom-journal. No one knows who they are.

So, what I'm saying is: On the one hand, maybe this will attract people who are trolls. But on the other hand, it's not that much different, a troll could still join and go to the journal area and do their worst.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

What I have in mind would be a feature that's only open to establish members, people we know.

As far as trolling goes, I'll repeat what I said to someone in private: I can't see anyone inviting other people to participate in their private journal and then acting like a dink. The people you invite will know who you are and are most likely going to be the people whose opinions matter most to you.

I've posted threads in Journals before, but I disliked the experience because anyone could comment and cause arguments. I'd like to share some of my experiences and thoughts in that forum, but I don't want others to post rude and argumentative remarks. I'd like it if only my friends could comment.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

"On other websites, I've seen the implementation of anonymous journals (of sorts), and though not exactly like this idea, they're prone to being shut down because people are prone at interpreting anonymous as rule-free, and the feature on these other sites attracts some of the wrong people, as well."

@Quagmire is right.

'Nuff said.

 

[Quagmire]

Hopefully this was clearer after you read the end of my reply? The individual is not inviting anyone.

Why would that matter? If he's breaking the rules it's going to be dealt with just the same.

Am I misunderstanding the meaning of that word?

No, you're just ignoring the fact that the same word can have different meanings.

I already explained the difference between what I'm talking about and what @Snow White is talking about.

If you, for whatever reason, choose not to see or understand the difference, not much I can do about that.

We're still talking about two different things.

It means that they can post things without the general users here from knowing who it is.

Yep, that's kind of the point.

"On other websites, I've seen the implementation of anonymous journals (of sorts), and though not exactly like this idea,

Or in this case not even remotely the same idea.

they're prone to being shut down because people are prone at interpreting anonymous as rule-free,

This one wouldn't be rule free (check the op again) and anybody who chose to interpret it as such would probably get into trouble pretty quick.

and the feature on these other sites attracts some of the wrong people, as well."

Who exactly among our membership would you consider to be the "wrong people"?

If the I request an anom-journal and invite no one, then only the staff knows and no one else.

Why would that be a problem?

I'm not staff, I don't know how you would police it and determine if it turns into something that is inappropriate.

The same way we police the forums. Why would this be any different?

I think it would be difficult to make those sorts of judgements. But I'm not you. Yes, I am 100% confident that revoking the priviledge is easy and simple.



Yes.



Any person ( not a current member ) could join,

No, they couldn't.

no one knows who they are,

Staff knows.

go to the journal area, and troll all they want ( until they get kicked out ). It's basically the same thing as having an anom-journal.

No, it's actually something completely different from what you're talking about.

No one knows who they are.

Staff knows, and whoever they invite is going to know.

If they don't invite anyone (although I don't understand why you think that would be such a common occurrence) staff will still know who they are.

So, what I'm saying is: On the one hand, maybe this will attract people who are trolls.

Only if you consider some of our established members to be trolls.

But on the other hand, it's not that much different, a troll could still join and go to the journal area and do their worst.

 

[Quagmire]

I've posted threads in Journals before, but I disliked the experience because anyone could comment and cause arguments. I'd like to share some of my experiences and thoughts in that forum, but I don't want others to post rude and argumentative remarks. I'd like it if only my friends could comment.

That's exactly what I'm proposing @Sgt. Pepper, and thank you for your support.