What's in a user name?

Remove all ads!

What's in a user name? Really. Like everyone on the net I've been browsing several boards for years and I have seen many nonsensical names. Some are quite funny but others are really in poor taste.

I once visited a forum in which a nerd used "God" as a screen name. Despite being stupid and offensive to believers I can understand that it may come from a need to compensate for some deep flaw in one's character and a lack of self confidence.

Of course the same logic applies if you use Thor on a forum and you most certainly will bring upon yourself the wrath of every active followers of the Thunder god -not to mention the fact that such a screen name is highly unoriginal, it's certainly best to avoid being the subject of the curse of pagan deities.

Nevertheless I did not post today to make silly jokes but more seriously to share my surprise and shock after seeing a screen name that really shocked me i.e. WaffenSS.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for free speech and the right to express oneself but (and I don't think I'm being over dramatic) I don't think that you should get away with screen names like these (furthermore I'm talking about a gaming forum, not a WW2, a neo Nazi or a white supremacist mailing list).

How confused and clueless does anyone has to be to use such a distateful (and in that context distateful is a very mild term) pseudonym?

 

Just remember that neo-NAZIs are people, too. Crazed, deranged people, but they get around.

Personally, I think a lot of people go for screen names for either the ego effect (thus god, thor, zeus, etc.) or for the shock effect (thus waffenSS, satan, bloodlust, etc.).

My screen name on this is pretty self-explanatory, I think. On the BioWare message boards, I go by Planetus, which has more to do with the original meaning of the term than the current association.

 

I understand that you are trying to point at a paradox. But I have another question for you: how can you be free to express yourself if you don't recognize any limitations whatsoever? Without limits there can be no freedom and no rights either.

As a moderator you know better than most that people are free to post and express themselves as long as they respect the forum rules and other posters. Therefore I think that your (rhetorical) question doesn't negate the validity of my argument.

If a poster chooses such a loaded user name (such as WaffenSS) you can rightfully assume that this person does so either to provoke or to make a statement. I believe that to condone such practices is tantamount to embracing the ethos they represent. What's next? What would be your reaction to a user who would choose "Hitler" as a user name?

 

Caradhras, you have a strange view of freedom.

In the US, freedom of speech means you are free to express your opinions, whatever they are. There are limitations to all our freedoms as are necessary for the continuity of a socity, for example freedom of speech does not cover freedom to advocate violent or illegal acts, but such is not necessary for the freedom to exist, just for it to be practical.

What you suggest is that, while you supposedly support freedom of speech, you would not support freedom of speech covering the NAZI view, or support of their position. This suggests you support freedom of "speech that you like" while "speech that you don't like" should not be free. That's not freedom of speech.

As a side note, allowing someone to express a view, be it objectionable or not, is NOT tantamount to supporting such views or "embracing the ethos they represent".

 

Complete freedom of speech is silly. There has to be some level censor. Just not too much... its a thin line, and the human race is pretty sh*t with thin lines.

 

There is always the matter of manners and good taste. It should be just as important as "freedom", imo.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should do it and I think that people should take responsibility for what they say and do.

Everything you do represents you.

If you do not agree with a specific philosophy that a certain nickname will immediately get connected with and yet you choose to use that nickname, than you are deliberately portraying yourself differently - and deserve what ever opinion people form about you from your ill-chosen nickname.

Being disrespectful and insulting to someone merely because you couldn't be bothered to give a forethought to your actions and consider the impact they will have on the people you are interacting with is just stupid. It's idiocy.

If the sole purpose of a person's action - like picking a username that is offensive - is to cause a negative reaction in others, then that person has issues and should resolve them. Whether its immaturity, stupidity or plain lack of manners it's not something to be proud of.

If you do agree with a philosophy behind a controversial nickname, well, that's entirely your business, but don't expect others (non-members of the group) to respond to you the same way they would to a person with a "neutral" nickname. If one truly identifies oneself with a potentially harmful philosophy to a degree that he/she/it has a pathological need to show the whole world that, to a degree of flaunting such controversial beliefs in clearly adverse environments then again, professional help might be needed.

I am not saying this should be pushed to extremes (some nicks may be unusual/silly/poorly thought of but not on the wrong side of poor taste.)

(I am not getting into religion(s) - everything is volatile with that topic and people with strong religious views sometimes push those to extremes even they don't fully believe just in order to counter a different opinion. It's zeal more then reason.)

Personally, I don't see how any say nazi nickname can be acceptable. I wouldn't want anything to do with someone going under a nickname "hitler". Regardless of who they might be in a different context, that alone tells me that they are not a person worthy of my time and attention. I don't want to be around someone who thinks that it's ok to use that name.

A code of conduct in all situations should be something that every person has. To intentionally disrespect, insult or cause discomfort to the person that you are interacting with is shameful. Picking usernames is no different then any other action. If anything, it is more personal - you stand behind your screenname and express your opinions through the virtual alter ego bearing that name. It matters.

 

This alone makes your opinion entirely worthless in my eyes.

Most people don't deserve the effort thinking ahead takes. You may call it idiocy, but indeed, everything you say represents you.

There is plentiful reasons to be proud of being perceived as immature and being seen as lacking manners. And stupidity wouldn't cause intentionally picking an offensive username. Again, I see your opinion and I consider myself a better person disagreeing. Your cultural preconceptions are offensive but fortunately of little consequence.

 

Loreseeker, I think I have to disagree with just about everything you said. Freedom trumps taste and manners every day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

At the same time, someone expressing their opinion with something like a nickname is no more out of line then that same person expressing that same opinion with a politely worded philosohpical outline, no matter how volatile that opinion may be. If you want to prevent one, you have to be behind preventing the other, which means silencing discussion of anything that may offend anyone, which is stupid.

All in all, I think the US generally has a good policy on Freedom of Speech, which basically says anything that legitimately contributes to a discussion and does not condone any breach of law is acceptable. There's a bit more to it than that, but that seems to be the basic principle. It basically assumes that a mature adult is capable of being insulted or offended without resorting to violence, which is usually true.

 

I merely believe that it's far more challenging and gratifying to win a discussion within a set of rules that limit you. It enables you to grow. Anyone can win by breaking the rules. It's overrated. To play in accordance with something that someone else might consider a handicap and yet achieve your objectives is a fun feeling for me. Surpassing your own limits, without trampling down everyone elses.

Also, I really don't see what is wrong with being polite. Things that are merely said/done to provoke, disrespect, insult are cheap shots. Useless from the core of discussion point of view, present only for the flare and special effect. Crowd-pleasers.

NOG, I never said freedom is bad thing nor anything against it. I wasn't reffering to the ideal of freedom - that's why I used "freedom". I was probably unclear - it happens to me rather often.

Taza, even if most people aren't worth the forethought, it's not really about them. It's about the person speaking/acting. Who you are and how you conduct yourself in a discussion/argument/action shouldn't depend on your environment. If I want my actions to reflect me, I will think about them - regardless of who I might be interacting with.

Also, maturity and manners shouldn't be a bad thing. If one is dissatisfied with a current society (or humans in general) that's perfectly fine, but being mature and having good manners really shouldn't have negative connotations by themselves, imo.

Disagreement is also perfectly normal.

(Well, serves me right to have poked my nose in the Alleys What was I thinking? Enjoy the rest of the argument gentlemen.)

 

Maturity and manners are almost entirely dependent on the society.

They're meaningless concepts outside a certain society, and what's seen as good manners in one place is horribly rude in another.

 

Well, if you want to have fun in a debate, that's something else altogether, and you can use whatever rules or limitations you and your opponent want, but that's different from a productive discussion. The point of a productive discussion is to actually convey information and perspectives and to reach a conclusion. Some things simply can't be said without being rude, and other are much easier said rudely than politely.

And nothing's wrong with manners or taste at all, they are convenences, whereas freedom is often a necessity.

I think maturity is pretty constant across societies, but morality and manners definitely aren't.

 

I'll have to say I disagree there.

Maturity's definition differs between social groups - even within the same general society.

 

I think we all agree that freedom should not be tantamount to anarchy and lawlessness.

Do you think that there is any freedom of speech on the boards? Because if we follow your logic we have to recognize the fact that there are limitations and rules regarding what can be posted and said (therefore no freedom of speech since from what I've read here freedom of speech can't exist with constraints). Does that mean that you can't be free to express yourself on the boards because of the existence of forum rules? I wouldn't agree with that.

I don't want to get into an argument about the US, but you have to recognize that communists were ostracized because of their political belief. The US government considered Communism to be a very dangerous ethos and deliberately repressed communists. Putting aside politics, censorship has had a deep impact on movies as well (e.g. the Hays code). Is that freedom of speech?

That being said I won't deny that you're quite correct on your assumption that I haven't got much patience for Nazis or anyone endorsing such an ethos. I won't stop and listen to someone openly advocating Nazism (which is even worse than proponing racism and xenophobia). Nazis are more than regular extremists or facists: you can't separate Nazism from evocations of mass murder and genocide.

The "practicality" you refer to is very reasonable but it is a fallacy to assume that anyone proponing Nazi views doesn't endorse violence and brutality (along with hatred and racism). Of course, I understand that you disagree with that point and that in your opinion it is fine for someone wearing a svastika and complete SS regalia to discuss the literary value of Mein Kampf and the superiority of the Aryan race as long as they don't "advocate violent or illegal acts".

 

I don't think anyone's saying the only form of freedom is absolute freedom, just that any form of constraint limits freedom to some degree or another. With that in mind, we have limited freedom of speech here on the boards, less than we have in the US due to the fact that this is a private entity owned and operated by a private individual who has set his own rules. (All Hail Tal! ) I'm not complaining, they work very well for managing what is intended to be polite and controlled discussion, but those rules have to be (and have been) specifically spelled out.

The communist ostracizing was action based on their speech. The people were free to say what they wanted (well, there were these very iffy trials, but...), but others were free to act in response (within the law). The Hays Code was a voluntary self-censorship, not required.

I wouldn't say can't, since the neo-NAZI movement in the US is legal. If they were openly advocating murder, they'd all be arrested. Asside from that, I fully understand and agree, but that doesn't mean silencing them is the best option.

Believe me, I hate that kind of talk as much as you do, but, as Voltaire said, "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." That is a thought you'll find strong in much of America, as it heavily influenced the American Revolution.

 

No actually, we don't. The Consititution says that the government shall not abridge a person's right to free speech, and we have freedom of the press. However, we don't have freedom of speech in its fullest sense. As an example, there was the woman who was fired from her job because she had a John Kerry sticker on her car. Her boss was a GWB supporter and fired her for her contrary political statement.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2106714/

Here's more, this time from the "left."
http://www.slate.com/id/2070423

Note that the woman did not have health care benefits at her former job.

 

Freedom of Speech does not guarantee never having that freedom violated by your employer. It does, however, essentially guarantee you the right to sue -- and win -- when your employer fires you over a bumper sticker.

 

When I first came here I though Ragusa was for "Rag USA" as in rag on the USA or be durrogatory toward the US. I thought it was clever given his opinions ... I was disappointed when he said differently.

Sometimes names can be a good clue that I really don't want to get involved with a person. Some of the names on singles chats (which I have not frequented in many years) were quite disturbing.