It’s rarely a good thing when politicians start thinking. The topics on which they train their brains are usually left reeling from the experience. Take for instance the most recent example of a politician who feels anonymity should be banned from websites where people discuss politics.
Now I‚Äôm no fan of Declan McCullough – the CNet writer who brings us the story – but this time he‚Äôs on the money. New Jersey State Assemblyman Peter Biondi has apparently scrapped his belief in the constitution, free speech, and such. Apparently Biondi thinks you should be required to post your name and address as part of posting on forums, and would require the forum host to make that information available to anyone who claims to have been hurt by the post.
Instead of anonymous posts leading to pre-pubescent bitch fights in cyberspace, someone could just throw rocks through your window, egg your car, or leave you offline threats. Great plan, Pete. As an encore, do you plan to arm them all and send them out into the streets?
You‚Äôre frame of reference is way off on this. Anonymity doesn‚Äôt protect the annoying poster. Anonymity protects the considerate poster from the nut jobs he aggravated without even knowing it. That‚Äôs the piece you failed to take into account. Or perhaps you didn‚Äôt‚Ä¶
It‚Äôs entirely possible that candidates could claim an aggrieved status to get the names and use their political cronies to carry out some form of retribution. But come on, we know politicians in Jersey would never do anything like that‚Ä¶