Please share with us your feelings about users who create multiple accounts merely to reiterate their particular opinions. We're all ears. :bigear:
Why, I be delighted to do just that, Rick. By the way, I notice you said "we're all ears" as if to suggest you are speaking for many. This is not a criticism. On the contrary, I laud your subtle tactic to foster the illusion of plurality.
😉
Multiple identities to reiterate particular opinions?
I've done this on another forum but never here. Why not here? Very simple. There is a posted rule on this forum forbidding multiple accounts. The other forum not only had no such posted rule, but when I asked one of the head admins, I was told there was no such rule. I got a verbal green light. So I did it.
LOL. There are people over there who still to this day describe what I did as the most despicably dishonest thing one could do on a forum, creating "fake" identities. To them, it was as bad as identity theft or plagiarism. I pointed out to these people that virtually everybody on that forum logged in with a "fake" identity, unless they believed that people were born with the names TickleMaster or DarkFiend69. But they couldn't hear me over the sound of their self-righteous indignation.
I think what bothered these people the most was that I robbed them of an easy win via simple unanimity. Instead of being able to gleefully pile on one person, they were each faced with a different opponent. Suddenly they found themselves (some for the first time) in a situation that required them to actually make an effort to come up with logical debates and reasonable arguments rather than their preferred method of intimidation by numbers.
They looked at it as dishonesty. I looked at it as a creative and legal way to even the playing field in game of forum debate. In my opinion, a debate is either won or lost by the quality of the points offered, how effective the opposing points were countered, and how well the facts support one side or the other.
It is not a popularity contest that's decided by which opponent has more people in agreement.
Though this may seem like a departure from the topic, I believe that the intimidation-by-numbers tactic is a form of social censorship. Keep in line with the majority posture or suffer the consequences.