h a l f b a k e r yAmbivalent? Are you sure?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I understand that some people hate the idea of users having multiple accounts but I also understand the *need* for it.
As I said under waugs' "Out the Doppelbaker" idea, some people just grow weary of being who/what others expect of them.
Is Swiss cheese the answer? No, I don't think so.
I
have maintained that responsible bakers will create other identities to free themselves from the baggage of a current ID while self-reproducing trolls will be revealed and ousted as such.
Again, the reasons for assuming another ID by a responsible baker is generally a personal reason which makes sense to that person alone and allows them to regain a level of comfort.
Here is the idea (finally!) that *could* be the solution.
When a baker grows weary of their account name, they send an email to jutta requesting a search/replace. To use a *real bakery life* example, it would woik like this.
PS would email jutta and request a seach/replace. At that time, jutta would then find everytime that PS appeared in the bakery, all annotations and ideas, all references by others to him. All those places where his name occurred would then be replaced with a new name such as "BakerMaker".
jutta would own the BakerMaker account as well as block the PS handle from ever being used again, PS would have be free to move on to a new account under whatever name he chose, and no Swiss Cheese would occur.
Same goes for waugs and blissmiss who also deleted thier elves at times. jutta would have replaced waugs' original *life* with the name "dogscreek" and waugs would have be free to move on with nothing formally being associated with his new persona.
All blissmiss's ideas that have been lost would now be accessible under the account name, "kissthiss" and she too would have moved on.
jutta would own the dogscreek and kissthiss accounts and by special permission, waugs and blissmiss could regain their names to begin again.
One last thought. For this to really work and allow the person who instigated it the freedom to move on, when bakers saw it happen, they would maintain a code of silence and not discuss it.
By the way, if this feature ever becomes available, I have an account I'd like to retire.
[link]
|
| |
Although such an operation is trivial in a RDBMS such as MS Access, I recall that when [SteveDeGroof] changed his username from [degroof], Jutta had to do some fairly complex fiddling around, so it may not be as simple as it first appears. Jutta could, of course, simply change the password on the retired account, leaving the username unaffected. |
|
| |
So what you're actually suggesting is a name-change? |
|
| |
Baked - see half, formerly half_crazy. |
|
| |
Happy, Miss Spelling? If that *is* your real name... |
|
| |
(damn, angel got there first..) |
|
| |
This changed in effort between releases 1 and 2 of the database. (Steve's name change was the only one I remember in release 1.)
It's still some manual effort, and probably buggy, and I'm not entirely comfortable with it, but it's at least still possible - it wouldn't be with the old version. |
|
| |
Given an existing body of work that people associate with the old name, it won't create a new identity, though, just a new name. Is that enough? |
|
| |
Yeah, but as I recall somebody double-dog dared me, I had to do it. I thought that all happened in the Pre-yamahito era. |
|
| |
Might it not be better to stop worrying what other people 'expect' of a username? |
|
| |
Pick any two of my old ideas or annotations and it'll be fairly obvious I was in different moods when I posted them. I don't feel obligated to match anyone's expectation of me. |
|
| |
This is bullshit. It encourages more deceit of the kind I am rallying against. |
|
| |
Please don't presume to know the reasons why I removed my account, or what solutions would work best for me. |
|
| |
You are obviously an established halfbaker. Why do you choose to hide behind a false identity? How is this not deceitful and untrustworthy? |
|
| |
(wow, i'm an era.. (no, just after, half)) |
|
| |
//Please don't presume to know the reasons why I removed my account, or what solutions would work best for me.// |
|
| |
But yet you seem to think that you understand fully the motivations behind the creation of dual accounts by others and that it is wrong because you declare it thusly so. |
|
| |
//You are obviously an established halfbaker. Why do you choose to hide behind a false identity? How is this not deceitful and untrustworthy? // |
|
| |
What I find deceitful and untrustworthy is that as a member of IBD, YOU have access to sappho and other's private information. Now, I consider IBD the equivalent of AA and everything said between those walls is for those folks only. It is wrong on so many levels to drag that private info into the halfbakery. |
|
| |
Aha - he said knowingly, but not entirely convincingly. |
|
| |
welcome - my dream is still a mystery to me :) |
|
| |
One of my alters on Landover is a mean barstid whose specialty is ripping trolls, and another is a kindhearted but wandering old loony, and another is an islander from a fictional south sea paradise who writes a pidgin made up of malapropisms, missplellings, and poetic license. |
|
| |
What is your purpose on the Halfbakery: ideas or character? Waugs, amigo, O Halfbaker of Old, I do understand your wish to know to whom you speak. But I also know the wish of others to speak in various voices. Inasmuch as any internet bulletin board is a fiction wrapt in a fantasm, for myself I must reserve the right to censure or applaud on a purely individual basis. |
|
| |
And, as the moderators know, on the HB I have never bothered to be anyone but poor Dog Ed. |
|
| |
Landover: you mean there's life outside the Halfbakery? |
|
| |
jutta: well, bloody hell, I wish you'd mentioned that sooner. |
|
| |
I have to vote for this idea. Anything to prevent the swiss cheese problem gets a croissant from me. This is definitely a reasonable alternative and we'd still have some great ideas that have been lost. |
|
| |
How about just having one new account called departed or something similar... then when an acount is deleted all its ideas and anotations are added to all the other deleted acounts' stuff... that way the ideas don't die but no-one knows who wrote them - or if they do they aren't talking... |
|
| |
The name change would also involve changing all mentions of every derivation of the name (eg PeterSealy, PS, Peter, Mr Sealy etc.). That's a hefty workload. On the other hand, as this web site is about ideas, it is a shame that a deleted baker takes all of his/her ideas with them. Neutral. |
|
| |
ravenswood: actually, as calum's second point, I was mainly trying to lose the annos and I am still sad that all the ideas went too. |
|
| |
calum: not necessary, I think. |
|
| |
After reading the research project on the Halfbakery I again found myself pondering one very unusual aspect of the HB. Most of the HB reflects some process which has come before - discussion, creation, annotation etc. However, account deletion is without parallel that I can see, except in Orwell's 1984. The ability of a user to completely eliminate their works of weeks, months or years is without parallel. In real life, a creator who is incapacitated or discredited by later events can still be remembered for his creations. In other endeavors, a person cannot retreive acts or works - they take on independent life. If I publish a theory and later repudiate it, the theory does not vanish - it remains available for those who come after. Perhaps it will inspire, serve as a bad example, or offer up a useful part to be used in another construct. |
|
| |
At its heart, the [HB] is [jutta]'s hobby, to do with as she sees fit. I am making no suggestions. It does seem to me that this aspect would be worth more consideration in future academic analyses. |
|
| |