Most recent activity
-
For me this sounds a bit like the "Nothing to hide nothing to fear" argument when talking about surveillance. Sometimes I don't want my behaviour to be easily trackable by others I know, especially in a profession context. For some forums I can imagine real names being useful, for instance anything which relies on the external (non-forum) reputation of the participants, e.g. a scientific discussion forum.
I can also see a case for it being optional within the same forum, e.g. A forum for health/medical advice/support might want advisors to use their real name, but give other participants the option of remaining anonymous.
-
2) The notion that a private message is private is a fallacy today, but with increased transparency about when your messages are forwarded and shared fewer people will do so and they will be more private.
...
So where's the concern?Logically that makes perfect sense. In practice I think people are too accustomed to the idea of 1-to-1 conversations, even it's an illusion. Are you confident you can persuade all users to understand this?
-
A mate of mine just pointed out this "completely new sport"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-22902230
-
-
-
If you do go for a recruitment drive (twitter/facebook/website/flyers/posters) put down the regular practice time try and make sure there's someone at the court even if you're not sure about numbers. Some people find the idea of having to sign up to something off-putting, there were a few occasions in Oxford where none of the regulars turned up, followed by an angry email from a new person the next day. Or just cycle round everywhere with a mallet, it gets attention. Or blag your way into the local newspapers/radio, they're always looking for something interesting. Or send out a press release, "Bike polo cuts risk of cancer by 35%", the Daily Mail will love it and won't care whether it's true or not.
-
-
What route did you do in the end?