Exchange with Mr Philip Yeo part 2 - On the issue of anonymity

It is now apparent that my blog has come within Mr Philip Yeo's radar. He produced an excerpt of a post in my blog whilst commenting on Aaron Ng's blog.

Mr Philip Yeo raised a pertinent issue, my choice to remain anonymous. I understand that he is trying the expouse the value of responsibility, that a blogger who reveals his identity in the open will more likely be responsible for his comments. I commend Mr Yeo for espousing such a value.

However, my choice to remain anonymous has more to do with events in the past rather than the present. In the past, I blogged articles of a controversial nature. I did not resort to any form of vitriolic attacks or ad hominen arguments in my articles, but nonetheless, the topic I touched on was ultra sensitive. It got to the point that dissenters from both sides started mudslinging, character assassination and spamming, leading to the subsequent degeneration of what seemed to be an online gathering of netters into a cesspit of verbal excreta. A lot of things happened. I was even banned from a forum and chatroom. My posts were deleted because moderators found my articles to be controversial and DID NOT want their younger sheeps to be influenced. Readers can refer to my blog post 'Of religion and politics' to obtain an idea of the nature of articles I wrote in the past.

It is my desire to create a blog to allow for free exchange of ideas, and synthesis of new ideas. Due to my past baggage, I have set up a new identity, created this blog and even uploaded past products of my doodling. I have received some positive words of encouragement from commentators of my blog, and I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to them. In fact, I would like to invite them and their like-minded friends to my humble tavern for multiple rounds of drinks. It is in fact open to all travellers on the Internet highway. Free flow of beverages from ale, rum, sake, green tea or even eight treasures tea will be served.

I sincerely believe that in my exchange with Mr Philip Yeo, I conducted myself with decorum expected of a responsible netizen, staying clear of insults, ad hominen attacks, character assassination and mudslinging. I stuck to the main issues of discussion, and have not made any baseless allegations of a defamatory nature to anyone and any organization. I did not resort to sniping attacks under the cover of anonymity. The only outstanding issue is a mere minor disagreement with Mr Philip Yeo on the topic of AcidFlask, whose works has a follower in me as a fan. My opinion of AcidFlask is that he is a great science writer with an uncanny ability to grapple with diverse scientific topics from physics and Math to chemistry and computer science. If Mr Philip Yeo so desires, we can leave out the topic of AcidFlask from future exchanges. It wouldn't be healthy for the good cells in our body if we keep clinging on to topics that has been a major source of angst.

Lastly, I would also like to point out to Mr Philip Yeo that there is no such thing as a full anonymity status on the Net. When someone writes a defamatory remark, legal action can be taken and a court order can be served on the server hosting the remarks to reveal the IP address and on the Internet Service Provider to reveal the user.

philip yeo // Mar 16, 2007 at 8:17 am
In this blog, you know who is the blogger.
Almost all blogs are sadly anonymous.Like yours too. Sad.

P.S. I would think it will be sadder still if my blog that has gotten off to a positive start after the Lunar New Year 2007 were to degenerate into the cesspit of rubbish during the yesteryear, hence my anonymity.