How can I contribute anonymously?

[Gzkn]

Hello. This project is certainly intriguing to me, but I value my privacy above all else, which I guess runs counter to the fundamental policies of this place. And no, I am not willing to give out my personal info to Constables. In the future, would there be a way for me to voice my opinion on articles through a pseudonym? Would I be able write drafts and submit them to the community for review? Or perhaps copy-edit articles and submit those versions for review? I could care less about the instant gratification of seeing my edits appear "live", so I would be perfectly fine with having Authors/Editors vet my contributions. I do feel that completely closing off the community to those unwilling to give out personal information (as I'm sure there are many) is not the best way to grow.

[Larry Sanger]

Hello. This project is certainly intriguing to me, but I value my privacy above all else, which I guess runs counter to the fundamental policies of this place. And no, I am not willing to give out my personal info to Constables. In the future, would there be a way for me to voice my opinion on articles through a pseudonym? Would I be able write drafts and submit them to the community for review? Or perhaps copy-edit articles and submit those versions for review? I could care less about the instant gratification of seeing my edits appear "live", so I would be perfectly fine with having Authors/Editors vet my contributions. I do feel that completely closing off the community to those unwilling to give out personal information (as I'm sure there are many) is not the best way to grow.

Interesting point.  I do see merit in allowing some sort of ancillary stream of content (a comment forum) for each article, open to unregistered people.  It will no doubt be many months before we get around to adding such a thing, though; we have much higher priorities right now, I'm afraid.  There also remains the question whether we want input from people who we (not even constables) don't know.

[Stephen Ewen]

I am afraid it would be a can of worms, once opened.

[Stephen Repetski]

I had one suggestion that might cover some of these concerns: Instead of having people sign up with their name as their account username, would it be possible to make the username anything you wanted and just add another text box on the signup page for the person's real name? There could be a check box or something to only allow Constables to be able to see the name.

This pretty much lets people have anonymity if they want it and still keeps the real names

[Joe Quick]

Perhaps we can develop a system by which people could anonymously submit articles or suggestions to a workgroup.  Members of the workgroup would then have the option to (but would, of course, not be required to) incorporate those suggestions into new or existing articles.

[Stephen Ewen]

Upon thinking about this further, I am strongly against any mechanism for people to contribute anonymously.  This goes against the very foundation policy of non-anonymity. Given an "out", people too much tend to take it rather than the path of responsibility.

[Gzkn]

Perhaps we can develop a system by which people could anonymously submit articles or suggestions to a workgroup.  Members of the workgroup would then have the option to (but would, of course, not be required to) incorporate those suggestions into new or existing articles.

This was kind of what I was thinking. I think it'd be a good idea to register a nickname (like the forums) to do so. I'm not sure I'm getting how such a system would be anti-responsibility though, as Stephen Ewen suggests. It's not like people would be able to vandalize articles through this. And to prevent long-winded, unnecessary content disputes, just make it clear that actual Citizendium members are free to ignore any ideas they don't like. No would mean no. End of discussion.

I'd also imagine that this might be a good way to correct grammar/spelling mistakes...perhaps even attract copy-editors.

[David Tribe]

Im very sympathetic to the privacy aspect. But it needs to weighed against what we gain from the real name policy, which Ive highlighted in the other thread. Anonymity is a cloak that makes many poor behaviours possible

[Mike3]

Hello. This project is certainly intriguing to me, but I value my privacy above all else, which I guess runs counter to the fundamental policies of this place. And no, I am not willing to give out my personal info to Constables. In the future, would there be a way for me to voice my opinion on articles through a pseudonym? Would I be able write drafts and submit them to the community for review? Or perhaps copy-edit articles and submit those versions for review? I could care less about the instant gratification of seeing my edits appear "live", so I would be perfectly fine with having Authors/Editors vet my contributions. I do feel that completely closing off the community to those unwilling to give out personal information (as I'm sure there are many) is not the best way to grow.

Interesting point.  I do see merit in allowing some sort of ancillary stream of content (a comment forum) for each article, open to unregistered people.  It will no doubt be many months before we get around to adding such a thing, though; we have much higher priorities right now, I'm afraid.  There also remains the question whether we want input from people who we (not even constables) don't know.

It sounds like a great idea, IMO.

If they have a good contribution to make, there's no harm if you don't "know" them -- the idea speaks for itself insofar as it's worth goes. A moderated stream of potentially anonymous input, since it would not directly alter the article, would avoid many "bad" "contributions" precisely because of that -- someone else who isn't anonymous, ie. CZ community members (any of them, including experts), would have to actually put the changes to the article, and it would be expected that they exercise good judgment. For example some anon popping up and saying "put 'F*** BUSH!!!' on the 'George W. Bush' article" could simply be ignored. If they say, however, "The article 'George W. Bush' seems too pro-Bush (ie. non-NPOV) because <insert reason here>", with a rational reason there, that is a worthwhile comment and should definitely be considered. This would allow for anonymous users to have some power, but it would be regulated enough that they cannot harm the Citizendium.

In other words, I cannot see any harm coming from such anonymous input because the proposals would have to go through the community first to actually have an effect on the content, and it would be moderated.