
![]() | |
November 2009
October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
|
Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by!
June 7, 2009Who the f%^& are you?By GreyhawkI staggered back to the Underground Wanna be linked by everyone in the blogosphere? Try exposing an pseudonymous blogger. It works, and as a double bonus your subject's identity will be known far beyond the readership of your site. Bad form, says I - though so is hiding behind a pseudonym in order to be an obnoxious twit (note I'm not accusing anyone of that motive here). I maintained a pseudonymous blog here for many years and many reasons - at the outset primarily because as a milblogger I practiced more strict OPSEC than what's officially required; for example, someone who knew who I was could determine where I was, from that many other bad things could potentially follow. Bear in mind that was the calculation of a guy who was one of the first milbloggers, entering into an unknown world (and an unknown future at war) - and the handful that preceded me were all pseudonymous, a tradition that continues with the vast majority starting out today. I'm fine with that - I'd encourage it, even. But beyond potential OPSEC considerations, I tried to write everything I posted as though I were using my real name (as if Osama and your mama were reading is advice I follow and give freely). Part of the reason for that was anticipating I wouldn't be pseudonymous forever - that either by my choice or otherwise (as in the example above) I would one day be known. As things turned out, my choice was the answer in my case, but see Buzzell, Colby, or Beauchamp, Scott Thomas for examples of otherwise. (One of those gentlemen is also an example of a major flub of at least the mama part of the Osama and your mama rule, by the way. The other one got a nice book deal.) Now you can see and hear "the real me" all over this blog, and find things written under my own name (and citing this site) elsewhere - but "Greyhawk" lives on. He is me, of course, but also better known than I. I can live with that, because I am he and he is me and we are all together. But I suppose that the possibility of living in your own shadow (assuming you draw an audience) is something to consider for anyone - milblogger or otherwise - opting for pseudonymity for the all the right reasons. (Confession: it's also fun to observe the change in facial expressions and response I get introducing myself to people at conferences when after a brief pause I add "Greyhawk from Mudville" to my actual name.) More here (and thanks again, Glenn, if that's your real name...) More: Having read some explanations from pseudonymous (non-mil)bloggers for pseudonymous blogging of the "fears for repercussions in my personal/professional life" variety, I must ask the obviously begged question: are you saying people wouldn't like you if they knew the real you - revealed only in your blogging? This implies you've fooled them in the first place... Or are you saying the blogger you is a fraud? (If that's too harsh a characterization, perhaps that the blogger you is the person you would like to be if only you weren't I'm reminded too of the accounts I've heard where someone meets a blogger (known for their confrontational on-line behavior) in person and is surprised to discover they're actually rather polite, mild mannered, and soft-spoken. I'm never surprised by that, the behavior of many in the blogosphere is the sort that tends to get you fed your teeth when practiced in the real world. I understand that "loss of income" is persuasive and that the anonymity of the web can be cathartic for someone whose daily existence is a lie. Hell, I even understand that in a world full of compromise a Walter Mitty-esque existence online - where you're an uncompromising bastion of rock-solid beliefs and personal integrity - is damned attractive. But here's the lesson that should be learned: the internet security blanket does not exist. Outside of World of Warcraft and related sites the internet is not your personal and inviolable Magic Kingdom - it is a virtual extension of the real world, complete with actions and consequences. In many ways it's even more risky to sound off here - where people who couldn't (by lack of capacity or inclination) feed you your teeth in the physical universe won't hesitate to do so in a virtual sense - whether that impacts your "other life" or not. I prefer things kept civil myself, but then the real world I've lived in for the past several years has included folks who actually wanted to kill me (nothing personal, however) so I tend to be more lover less fighter here - and more interested in avoiding wars than fighting them wherever I may be, and winning them only when I fail. Maybe that makes me a wimp. If you think so, please let me know - if ever we meet in person. Complain endlessly about the fact that you don't have free speech. If no one shoots you or locks you in jail, you have free speech. If people call you an idiot, they have free speech too. Posted by Greyhawk / June 7, 2009 5:39 PM | Permalink 2 TrackBacksTrackBack URL: http://www.mudvillegazette.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/16258 And more FraudVets - geesh this is an amazing crew. And if you want to engage them, you can expect this in return:I really really really hope that someday Malkin and her counterpart, Ann "Fucking" Coulter end up laying hog-tied with electrical wire in ... Read More Hey - I'm a conservative this week!But later on Fox, New York Post columnist Ralph Peters attacked Smith and Herridge for claiming that the shooting “validated” the DHS report. Though some conservatives have concluded that the recent string... Read More 9 CommentsLeave a comment |
November 18, 2009Dawn Patrol 11/18/2009 [Mrs Greyhawk]
Welcome to the Dawn Patrol, our daily roundup of information on the War on Terror and other topics - from the MilBlogs and various sources around the world. If you're a blogger, you can join the conversation. If you link to any of these stories, add a link to the Dawn Patrol too and your trackback will be added to the list. Hat Tips to the Dawn Patrol are greatly appreciated.Refresh for updates.
AFGHANISTAN/PAKISTANBoondoggle -- [3rd Time, New Country - in Afghanistan] Clinton in Kabul for Karzai's inauguration -- [Foreign Policy - AfPak] The war of leaks -- [Foreign Policy - AfPak] Ridding Afghanistan of Corruption Will Be No Easy Task -- [Los Angeles Times] Afghan Minister Accused of Taking Bribe -- [Washington Post] Vision for Victory, Part I -- [Washington Times] U.S. Turns to Local Guns-for-Hire to Guard Afghan Outpost -- [Danger Room - Noah Shachtman] NATO Chief Confident Afghanistan Will Have More Troops -- [Voice of America] Germany to extend Afghanistan mission another year -- [AP] Pakistani Successes May Sway US Troop Decision -- [New York Times] Where are Taliban and al Qaeda commanders, US media asks Pak -- [Daily News & Analysis] Pakistani Army Shows Off Captured Taliban Posts -- [Washington Post] IRAQIraqi Kurds Warn of Election Boycott in Dispute Over Seats - [Washington Post] US has time to reconsider Iraq drawdown plan-Odierno -- [Reuters] A few words from medics for the 41st Brigade -- [The Oregonian] Goodbye to Iraq, and thanks -- [The Oregonian] U.S. AND OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLDUS, China in Strained Diplomatic Embrace -- [Wall Street Journal] Obama: 'We've restored America's standing' -- [CNN] Somali Pirates : Maersk Alabama Attacked, Fights Back -- [Eagle Speak] Iranian COS Warns Russia: Your Security Is Tied To Ours -- [Memri Blog]
WAR ON TERROR /TERRORISMSuspected Fort Hood Shooter Believed to Be Self-Radicalized -- [Wall Street Journal] Guantánamo Won't Close by January, Obama Says -- [NY Times] SUPPORTING THE TROOPS...OR NOTNo Man Left Behind -- [Knottie's Niche] LTC Tim Karcher Update -- [Soldiers' Angels Germany] Support SA while Christmas shopping this year! -- [Soldiers' Angels Germany] Trees for Troops: Helping Military Families -- [AdAge.com] FOX 5 Special: I-Team VA Loans -- [FOX News] A FOX 5 I-Team investigation uncovered allegations of a nationwide scheme by banks and mortgage companies to defraud U.S. military veterans. The scheme, spelled out in court documents, claims banks are overcharging veterans on home refinancing loans. The question raised in a racketeering and class action law suit is how many of those loans involved banks defrauding U.S. military veterans. MILITARYMuslim discrimination in the U.S. military. Not. -- [Castra Praetoria] Time to revisit firearms policies on military posts -- [Atlanta Journal Constitution] Army's Record Suicide Rate 'Horrible,' General Says -- [Washington Post]
WELCOME HOMEVeterans' descendants welcome troops home to Fort Campbell -- [Clarksville Leaf Chronicle] 'Greywolf' Among First CAV Troops to Return Home -- [DVIDS] THE MEDIAWhere are Taliban and al Qaeda commanders, US media asks Pak -- [Daily News & Analysis] Army officials said that they have killed as many as 550 Taliban militants a month after the military began its campaign into the lawless territory, yet they acknowledge that hundreds, perhaps thousands more have melted away.
POLITICSRepublicans Criticize Obama's Call to Delay Hill Inquiries on Fort Hood -- [Washington Post] HUMOR / SATIRE
Iraq, Afghanistan, War, Terrorism, Military, Politics, Media, MilBlogs, dawn patrol Mudville
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
![]()
![]() I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2009 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com ![]() |
I don't think that encouraging folk to go open on their personal ident online is a good thing. There's lots of folk who read, some regularly, some casualty. Where ever there's lots of folk, you get some weirdos. Some of those weirdos are gonna be grudge holders of the violent kind. The kind that decide to come looking for whomever caught their attention.
You're advice on writing only what you wouldn't mind being publicly associated with is sound, and lord don't I wish I'd have figured that out for myself way long ago, or even that I was capable of following it now.
On the teeth feeding thing... yeah. Lucky me. I tend to be as belligerent with mere inches separating faces as I am with unknown miles separating monitors. I've had lots of lessons given me in the "watch your ****ing mouth, jackass" syllabus. Still gots all my teeths and no broken face bones, yet. Minor miracle, that.
Yep - the violent stalker thing is a matter of concern. I think there are plenty of good reasons to be a pseudonymous blogger (or "internet traveler" in general. I'm not saying anyone should abandon pseudonymity, I'm saying the safety of a pseudonym is a marginal shield at best.
I suppose it's like a cheap lock on a footlocker; it keeps honest people honest.
I comment under a psudomymn for personal and professional reasons. I do not want my professional life impacted due to my political beliefs. Peronally most people know who and what I belive in. I have tried to be civil and reasonableon the web since flame wars are just indulging in temper tantrums.
The prevalent social attitude is liberal. Most corporations adopted the multicultural line and if an employee is known to be against that and blogs about that, that could effect his/her employment. That is just an example.
The are enough examples of PC impacting employment and students at universities to justify caution.
This particular example, Mr Whelan indulged in petty vindictive behavior. If he could not defend his position in arguement, then he went and attacked the person. This is a real life "ad hominen"
I find it hard to understand a liberal facing reprecussions but it does happen to condervatives so I believe this outing is wrong and it certainly indicates that the personal temperament of Ed Whelan is improper as an AG since he does indulge in vindictive attacks.
This is a case where the outer nmay face greater consequences to his public reputation than Publius.
I beliiev in the outing in the case of Beuchamp who was pushing a slanderous narrative against our troops.
Excitable Andy S has slandered and libeled freely against Sarah Palin and been immmune to consequence. So blogging under their own name does not mean a civil tongue.
Wimp.
And next I see ya, I'll do it to your face, too. Assuming I can remember for that long.
I blogged openly from the beginning. Which isn't to say I told everybody who I was, I just didn't tell them anything.
I find "the blog as if Osama and your mama" were reading to be good advice.
It keeps things calmer. Keeps the traffic down, too, which is a mixed blessing and curse. Fewer trolls.
My company knows I blog, and I know I'm read by my bosses. That's a useful tocsin, in my case. Keeps me scrupulous about not blogging work, and maintaining that bright, shining line.
But - things I've said on the blog would probably cause some heartburn during the "due diligence" phase of promoting me to "officer rank" in my firm.
Which is okay. Been an officer, prefer being a sergeant these days.
Myself, I use a pseudonym to help cut down the outright spam in my personal inbox.
I'm a 'Golden-Ruler' in real life, and as Zero.
Now if I could be stalked only by nubile females who own breweries I'd send Zero on his way. Or maybe get my name changed to Zero??
I blog under a pseudonym to protect my privacy, and my children. I will never be a Michelle Malkin or a John Dovovan... but I'm perfectly happy being an AFSister. And those I've gotten to know outside of just writing comments know my real name- and I like it that way. My real name is very unique. I would not be hard to find if the name was public knowlege.
I wrote, briefly, for an anti-pedophile site. I used to post pictures of my kids on my personal blog- until I found out that some of the pedophiles targeted by the anti-site I wrote on were downloading their pictures. Scared the daylights out of me, and still freaks me out that some freak could have pictures of my kids. Trust me- there are many reasons people write under assumed names.
Okay big guy - you're on the list. ;)
"This particular example, Mr Whelan indulged in petty vindictive behavior. If he could not defend his position in arguement, then he went and attacked the person. This is a real life "ad hominen""
Sorry, RAH. You are mistaken.
Sayeth Publius/Blevins (amongst other ad hominem attacks):
"And don't feel sorry for Ed. He knows all this -- he's a smart guy with outstanding legal credentials. He just enjoys playing the role of know-nothing demagogue.", and:
"Whelan knows this is what he's doing. It's willful. He's essentially a legal hitman..."
There are plenty more insults where that came from, all from the venomous (and anonymous) keyboard of Pussius/Blevins. Once the anonymous Pubicus/Blevins stopped debating and started name-calling, he lost his right to whine about being outed.
So stop being obtuse and stop mis-stating the facts.
RAH
Something to ponder: Is an organization "liberal" if it's employees must fear veering from an rigid orthodoxy?
Even the people Rush Limbaugh calls "liberal" prefer to be called "progressive" now. ( I prefer "Leftist" but that's inadequate too.) One can dislike the direction in which they want to "progress", but it's more appropriate than Liberal, which absolutely doesn't fit the unquestioning acceptance of approved dogma that membership in the club requires.
As for the Leftist sobriquet, I consider that misleading because from my point of view they - like extreme Right Wing ideologues, share one end of a spectrum with me in the middle and anarchists on the other end. Maybe my group should be called the "tolerants". (It's tough to get us to impose our beliefs on others though...)
Anyhow, your comment got me thinking about that. Thanks.